1shevock.praxes for confident music improvising
Post on 18-Feb-2016
232 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
The Pennsylvania State University
The Graduate School
College of Arts and Architecture
PRAXES FOR CONFIDENT MUSIC IMPROVISING
A Dissertation in
Music Education
by
Daniel John Shevock
© 2015 Daniel John Shevock
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
May 2015
ii
The dissertation of Daniel John Shevock was reviewed and approved* by the
following:
Linda Thornton Associate Professor of Music Education Dissertation Adviser Chair of Committee
M. Daniel Yoder Professor of Music
Darrin H. Thornton Assistant Professor of Music Education
Heather Zimmerman Associate Professor of Education
Joanne Rutkowski Professor of Music Education Chair of Graduate Program in Music Education
*Signatures are on file in the Graduate School.
iii
ABSTRACT
Scholars in many fields of study have examined confidence. Within
music education, confidence is often studied through the lens of Bandura’s
social cognitive theory, and for music improvisation, much confidence work
has been accomplished through survey design and examined confidence to
teach improvisation or gender differences. Though Bandura’s self-efficacy
model provides a useful framework to study confidence as part of music
(especially in understanding why people’s behavior may differ markedly in
improvising), confidence may be important to improvising distinct from self-
efficacy theory, and deserves inductive and explorative treatment; I completed
three qualitative research studies on confident music improvising (CMI).
These three studies are shared in this dissertation, a phenomenological study
of CMI from the perspective of improvising performers (Chapter 2), a case
study of teachers at the jazz portion of a summer music camp (Chapter 3), and
most recently (Chapter 4), I explored CMI within the parameters of
improvisation teachers helping students build a personal, subjective sense of
confidence, which is needed to improvise musically.
In the first study, interviews and observations were conducted with three
self-described confident music improvisers: a bluegrass fiddler, a jazz bassist, and
a baroque violinist. Participants described their learning experiences with CMI.
The following essential themes emerged from that analysis – listening, criticism-
free environment, sequential experiences, passion for a style, and openness to
iv
learning. The first three of these themes were considered pedagogical and the
final two themes dispositional.
In the second study, case study design was employed to test the essential
pedagogical themes—listening, criticism-free environment, and sequential
experiences—against situational reality of the jazz portion of a one-week summer
music camp. The focus of this second study was on teaching CMI. Interviews,
observations, and documents were used to triangulate data. Teaching through
questions emerged as a theme of teaching CMI.
In the third study, an emergent, responsive interviewing research
design was used to explore the experiences of expert improvisation teachers’
teaching praxes for improving student confidence to improvise music. The
purpose of this qualitative study was to understand praxes of teaching CMI,
that is, how expert improvisation teachers conceive the techniques they use to
increase student confidence to improvise music. There were two research
questions. What teaching praxes do participants use to help unconfident
students become confident music improvisers? How does student gender
affect teaching praxes?
Keywords: improvisation, confidence, praxis, teaching, music
v
Table of Contents
List of Tables and Figures ...................................................................................... vii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ viii
Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 Praxes for Confident Music Improvising ......................................................................... 1 Students Learning Improvisation ...................................................................................... 5 Confident Improvisation and Gender .............................................................................. 7 Musicking ................................................................................................................................ 8 Free Play ................................................................................................................................. 8 Praxis ....................................................................................................................................... 9 A Praxial Question ............................................................................................................. 10 Summary of “The Experience of Confident Music Improvising” ........................... 11 Summary of “Teaching Confident Music Improvising at Summer Jazz Camp” 11 Introductory Conclusion .................................................................................................. 12
Chapter 2: The Experience of Confident Music Improvising ..................... 14 ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... 14 Transition ............................................................................................................................. 17
Chapter 3: Teaching Confident Music Improvising at a Summer Jazz Camp ............................................................................................................................. 18
Prelude .................................................................................................................................. 18 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 19 A Qualitative Case Study ................................................................................................. 23 Framework .......................................................................................................................... 25 Observations ........................................................................................................................ 26 Results ................................................................................................................................... 26 Gigi ........................................................................................................................................ 27 Listening ............................................................................................................................... 29 Criticism-Free Environment ............................................................................................ 30 Sequential Experiences ..................................................................................................... 32 Teaching Through Questions .......................................................................................... 33 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 35 Transition ............................................................................................................................. 37
Chapter 4: “A whole lot of people are a whole lot of scared”: Praxes for Confident Music Improvising ............................................................................... 38
Defining Confident Music Improvising ......................................................................... 44 Focus ..................................................................................................................................... 45 Locus ..................................................................................................................................... 46 Purpose and Research Questions .................................................................................... 46 Method .................................................................................................................................. 47 Theoretical Sampling ........................................................................................................ 48 Data Collection ................................................................................................................... 49 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 50 Participants .......................................................................................................................... 52 Trustworthiness .................................................................................................................. 53 Results ................................................................................................................................... 54
vi
Central Theme: Aural Instruction ................................................................................. 54 Teaching Through Questions, Time, and Visuals & Technology ............................ 63 Gender .................................................................................................................................. 64 Safe Environment ............................................................................................................... 66 Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 68
Chapter 5: Postlude ................................................................................................. 72 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 72 Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 76 Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 78 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 79
References .................................................................................................................... 81 Appendices ................................................................................................................. 93
Table 4.1: Sample Interview Segments .......................................................................... 93 Table 4.2: Participant Information Pseudonyms ........................................................ 94 Figure 4.1: Sampling Chart ............................................................................................. 95 Narrative 4.1: Societal Expectations .............................................................................. 96 Figure 5.1: Interreflecting Themes ................................................................................. 98
vii
List of Tables and Figures
Table 4.1: Sample Interview Segments
Table 4.2: Participant Information Pseudonyms
Figure 4.1: Sampling Chart
Narrative 4.1: Societal Expectations
Figure 5.1: Interreflecting Themes
viii
Acknowledgements
This dissertation would not have been possible without the help of
many teachers I have had at Penn State. I am indebted to Linda Thornton,
who has helped guide me during my earliest experiences with research and in
socializing to higher education. Though any list of influences would be
incomplete, many teachers have influenced my thinking through coursework
including Darrin Thornton and Joanne Rutkowski, who have helped me
improve as a writer, and Ann Clements, Robert Gardner, Madhu Prakash,
Davin Carr-Chellman, and Heather Zimmerman, who have challenged my
thinking. Dan Yoder has guided me as a musician, an improvising
vibraphonist, and in my understanding of jazz and jazz pedagogy. I am
thankful for the daily work of Lisa Stamm during my time at Penn State. I am
also grateful for the understanding and support of my wife, Mercedes Boggs,
and son, Penn Shevock.
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Praxes for Confident Music Improvising
Americans seem to value creativity as a central aspect of education, and
yet our educational system educates students out of their creativity too often
(Robinson, 2001/11). As Robinson stated, “Everyone has huge creative
capacities. The challenge is to develop them” (p. 2). I taught music for twelve
years, eleven in a large, urban school district. Over time, I developed a strong
belief in the importance of music improvisation as spontaneous musical
composition1 in my elementary bands and orchestras. I felt music improvisation
might play a vital role in fostering student creativity in schools.
My understanding of music improvisation brings together two theories,
praxial music education and free play. Praxial music education theorists Elliott
and Silverman (1995/2015) wrote, “What distinguishes an improvisation from a
performance is the human effort to compose in real time, though the weight of
this distinction depends on cultural appropriations” (p. 254, emphasis in original).
The emphasis on context to music improvising is also found in Nachmanovitch’s
(1990) description of improvisation as spiritual, spontaneous and liberating free
play. That author suggested, “The heart of improvisation is the free play of
consciousness as it draws, writes, paints, and plays the raw material emerging
from the unconscious. Such play entails a certain degree of risk” (p. 9). 1 This was my working definition of improvisation as a teacher. It was developed as an improvising musician, is shared with many jazz musicians, and is informed by, confirmed, and complicated within the literature cited later in this dissertation.
2
Nachmanovitch also explains, “Play is always a matter of context. It is not what
we do but how we do it” (p. 43). Improvisation in drawing, writing, painting, and
playing music are each contextually different. Further, there are cultural
appropriations connected to improvisation in jazz, rock-n-roll, hip-hop, bluegrass,
and other musical styles and genres that affect essentially what improvisations are
in context.
As I look back at my music education, music improvisation was
underemphasized and music reproduction skills, such as technical perfection and
facsimile of music as the composer’s intent, were emphasized. Improvisation was
not taught in undergraduate instrumental methods courses where I learned to
teach band and orchestra. Instead, those courses focused on teaching music
literacy through method books, tone production, ensemble conducting, and band
and orchestra literature. I came to believe these are important to music education
but not enough. Moving from my training (in music as reproduction) to the belief
in teaching music as spontaneous action, and the implication of this belief to my
teaching praxis, was a reflective process that continues.
After my undergraduate university studies, in addition to teaching in
public elementary schools, I began playing New Orleans style jazz music semi-
professionally. Music improvisation was an important part of this music.
Knowing there was some disconnection between my belief about music (that
music ought to be for creativity) and my elementary band and orchestra teaching,
I gradually began to incorporate improvisation in elementary band and orchestra
classes.
3
Through a process of trial and error, drawing on student teaching
experiences I had with an elementary jazz band, and the three years I taught
general music (employing the Orff approach to improvisation), I developed an
approach to teaching improvisation, through early jazz music, to elementary
instrumentalists. This approach focused on these five concepts; listening to
recordings, learning standards by rote, playing along with piano accompaniment
(context), echoing musical phrases (developing vocabulary2), and building interest
by encouraging students to take individual solos (agency).
I still taught music reading skills through methods books and band
literature, but now many lessons began with the students listening to recordings of
jazz standards, learning songs by rote, and improvising solos. I felt rote-learning
was important because jazz is historically an aural tradition. I played piano as the
students performed the songs from memory so that students would hear the
underlying chord structure as they improvised. I encouraged every student to play
solos so they would develop a sense of agency – students would feel empowered
to create their own music. My approach seems in line with Borgo’s (2007)
description of a pedagogical orientation traditionally found in jazz communities,
where “learning is not a matter of what one knows, but who one becomes” (p. 62).
I hoped my students, through performing situated improvisatory music, would
become creative people (people who create / creators).
2 In jazz, these phrases are often called licks. Some of these licks are codified and some are not. I extracted most of the phrases from the songs students were performing. The use of the term “vocabulary” echoes the work of Azzara (1993) who defines improvisation as a “manifestation of musical thought… an individual has internalized a music vocabulary and is able to understand and to express musical ideas spontaneously” (p. 330).
4
I came to believe that music improvisation could facilitate creative thought
and this creativity might transfer to nonmusical spontaneity – a belief that seems
to be corroborated by an fMRI study of the brains of improvisers (Limb & Braun,
2008). Interpreting their empirical data, Limb and Braun suggested, “the similar
findings seen for both Scale and Jazz paradigms, despite the musical simplicity of
the former, strongly suggest that our findings are attributable to neural
mechanisms that underlie spontaneity more broadly rather than those specific to
high-level musicality alone” (p. 6, emphasis added). The findings that music
improvising might affect neural mechanisms of spontaneity can inform advocacy
for music improvisation pedagogy. If the neural mechanisms at play during
music improvisation affect other actions requiring spontaneity (such as invention
and problem solving) it seems logical that learning music improvisation has
implications for music and beyond music. Music improvisation pedagogy seems
to have wide-ranging implications for humans as spontaneous creators.
And yet, confidence (or lack-thereof) is an issue for many music
improvisation students and teachers (Alexander, 2012; Della Pietra & Campbell,
1995; Madura Ward-Steinman, 2007; Shevock, in-press-a; Shevock, 2013
February; Shevock, 2013 November; Watson, 2010; Wehr-Flowers, 2006).
Without confidence to improvise, it is impossible for music teachers and students
to reap the benefits improvisation pedagogy might inspire. Because of the
possible transferable nature of improvisation to spontaneity in general, music
education that includes improvisation can play a distinctive role in the public
school educational system, but more needs to be known about students’
5
confidence, the learning of music creativity, and how confident music
improvising (CMI) might be taught.
Students Learning Improvisation
Improvised music is a meaningful part of many of the world’s music
cultures (Bailey, 1992). Allsup (1997) described learning music through
improvisation as authentic, with the potential to facilitate transcendence. The
opportunity to facilitate transcendent experience provides reason enough to learn
how to effectively teach improvisation. Coker (1964) suggested five factors
affect the success of jazz improvisations, “intuition, intellect, emotion, sense of
pitch, and habit” (p. 3). Consequently, the author suggested focusing on
developing student intellect to improvise, as “four of these elements… are largely
subconscious” (p. 3). Can these elements be enculturated?
The concept of teaching improvisation may be limited, because teaching
improvisation may be problematic. Hickey (2009) recommended employing
“enculturation” (p. 286), focusing on students’ freedom to explore music rather
than teaching improvisation. Kingscott and Durrant (2010) investigated jazz
keyboard and organ improvisation phenomenologically and concluded, “… by a
process of assimilation and formal learning, one reaches a point where meaningful
improvisation may take place” (p. 141). These conclusions are consistent with
Berliner’s (1994) descriptions of jazz musicians. Perhaps formal teaching needs
to evolve into less-formal learning activities so students can be enculturated to
improvise. This seems consistent with Gordon’s (2003) audiated music
6
improvisation sequences, which move a student from discrimination learning to
inference learning, and Lucy Green’s (2008) informal learning pedagogy.
Many authors have connected learning to improvise with acquiring a
vocabulary and have placed an emphasis on the development of aural skills (e.g.
Azzara, 1993; Coker, 1964; Martin, 2005; Shevock, in-press-a). “The most
common form of improvisation is ordinary speech” (Nachmanovitch, 1990, p.
17). While many people are confident speakers and can fluently hold
conversations, it may be that musicians do not have the necessary musical
vocabulary or grammar to improvise confidently. According to Nachmanovitch,
the vocabulary of music improvisation is the “building blocks,” and the grammar
is the “rules for combining them” (p. 17). Martin (2005) adds, “the apparent
spontaneity of improvisers and improvising is actually the result of extensive
work and experience in acquiring the musical vocabulary of an improvising style
community and, gradually and painstakingly, developing ways to extend that
vocabulary in personal ways” (p. 169). For Martin (who is expanding upon
Elliott’s praxial music education) personal expression is built within a social
context (i.e. an improvising style or genre).
Teacher confidence to teach improvisation may be important to
improvisation pedagogy. Music educators learning to improvise have been
researched ethnographically by Della Pietra and Campbell (1995), who looked at
social interactions during a 5-week music teacher-training segment focused on
improvisation. They concluded students’ sensitivity to the process of
improvisation was enhanced through learning to improvise in a group setting.
7
Employing a survey, Madura (2007) concluded that confidence to teach
improvisation was improved through a summer jazz workshop. These findings
were echoed in Bernhard’s (2013) survey of music education majors.
Confident Improvisation and Gender
Another aspect of CMI, especially in jazz scholarship, is gender. Research
findings have been inconsistent regarding gender and how individuals experience
CMI (Alexander, 2012; Wehr-Flowers, 2006). This research suggests female
improvisers are less confident than male improvisers (Wehr-Flowers, 2006), and
then in replication that there is no significant difference (Alexander, 2012).
Wehr-Flower’s research is in line with Caudwell (2010) who suggested,
historically, jazz improvisation has denied women equal footing with men.
Certain instruments are viewed with masculinity, while female jazz musicians are
often consigned to the role of vocalist. Caudwell continued, “… it is worth noting
that Black African American women singing the blues, prior to the shifts to swing
and bebop, were expressing, often through vocal improvisation and visceral
narrative, their gendered and sexualized daily experiences” (p. 242).
MacDonald and Wilson (2006) suggested gender identity takes a back seat
to jazz musician identity. “The need to maintain identity as a jazz musician is,
then, prioitised [sic] over the identity project of femininity, to the extent that the
upset of discriminatory practices are positions as an individual problem” (p. 71).
Individuals negotiate identity in the social context of the jazz ensemble. If gender
is an issue to developing an improvising identity, then feeling confident as an
improviser might also be affected by gender.
8
Musicking
My experiences with musicking jazz have directed my own reflective
understanding of improvisation, and my understanding of improvisation was
expanded through interviewing and observing improvising musicians who play
jazz (Shevock, in-press-a; Shevock, 2013 February; Shevock, in-press-c),
bluegrass (Shevock, in-press-a; Shevock, 2014 April), baroque (Shevock, in-
press-a), and rock (Shevock, 2014 April). I also conducted a historical study of
an improvisation teacher (Shevock, in-press-b). How an individual chooses to
music has implications for his or her view of the world. This is because
musicking expresses “ideal relationships” (Small, 2001, p. 345), how people
believe they should live among one another. Small’s (1998) musicking is
important to CMI within the context of ideal relationships, improvising musicians
represent a certain set of values. Confidence is important in music improvising
because music improvising is not the primary way many musicians in school
music programs regularly music.
Free Play
Music improvisation can be understood within psychological and spiritual
contexts, wherein liberatory experiences can lead to the free play of consciousness
(Nachmanovitch, 1990). As Nachmanovitch suggested, “Improvisation is the
most natural and widespread form of music making” (p. 6), and yet improvisation
has not played a substantial role in the “literate musical tradition in the West” (p.
6), or in public schools, for more than a century. Because improvising music can
require overcoming fear, it may require a “breakthrough experience” (p.11),
9
which Nachmanovitch connects to the Zen concept of satori – “moments of
illumination and moments of change of heart” (p. 11). Therefore, CMI, especially
for students who have been taught in the literate musical tradition of the West,
may require teaching that leads to breakthrough experiences, and to overcoming
psychological and spiritual obstacles to CMI.
Praxis
My understanding of praxes of CMI includes praxis as a set of
improvisation instruction examples for practice, which increase student
confidence. How improvisation pedagogues conceive their practices is important.
I feel my line of research (Shevock, in-press-a; Shevock, 2013 February;
Shevock, 2013 November) has been particularly praxial because each research
study was initiated without first distinguishing CMI within the context of a set
social theory like Bandura’s model of self-efficacy.
Aristotle defined praxis, “praxis means active reflection and reflective
action for the positive transformation of people’s everyday lives and situations”
(in Elliott & Silverman, 1995/2015, p. 43). It seems Limb and Braun’s (2008)
findings about the possible transferability of music improvisation to spontaneity
in general makes improvisation pedagogy praxial in the sense that it involves a
transformation in everyday lives beyond music. My use of praxis is, in many
ways, in line with how praxis is used in education (e.g. Freire, 1970/93) and
music education (e.g. Elliott & Silverman). Echoing Aristotle, Freire defined
praxis as “reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it” (p. 51).
In this way, praxis can be viewed as larger than the application of improvisation,
10
but also includes a reflective process. I understand confidence as a personal
transformation of the students’ world. If teachers can foster confidence, there is a
transformation that allows students to express themselves within the context of
the classroom and/or public concerts. Elliott and Silverman suggested, “Praxis is
guided by an informed and ethical disposition to act rightly—musically, socially,
communally, and so forth—with continuous concern for protecting and advancing
human creativity” (p. 44, emphasis in original). In its concern for confidence,
teaching CMI is an ethical choice. Teacher praxes of CMI might help advance
human creativity, by fostering more improvisation and more creativity.
Regelski (1998) furthered our field’s understanding of praxis by
contrasting it with the concept of techne. As he wrote, “In ancient Greece, then,
techne referred to manual skill, craft, productively working with one’s hands” (p.
25). Therefore, techne involves “technical know-how” (p. 25), and making
things, where praxis is “inherently social” (p. 28). As the author continues,
“praxis regularly calls into question the ‘good’ of many products of technology
(techne) in terms of their consequences for human health, and prescribes
alternative ‘ideals’ that ought to be” (p. 29). In the current dissertation, informed
by Regelski’s distinctions between praxis and techne, praxis is separated from
mere teaching techniques by its reflective and social nature.
A Praxial Question
The scholarly explications of praxis by Elliott and Silverman (1995/2015),
Freire (1970/93), and Regelski (1998) have helped me construct a praxial guiding
question for this dissertation. How do teachers think about and enact music
11
improvisation praxis to improve student confidence to improvise music? Because
of this praxial guiding question, understanding how expert improvisation teachers
conceive of their teaching is important. My previous research into CMI has
explored the concept through participant perception (Shevock, in-press-a) and
observable teaching techniques (Shevock, 2013 February).
Summary of “The Experience of Confident Music Improvising”3
In this phenomenological study (Shevock, in-press-a), I interviewed three
self-described confident music improvisers: a bluegrass fiddler, a jazz bassist, and
a baroque violinist. During the two interviews with each participant, and
observations of improvised performances, each participant told me stories
describing experiences they felt were significant to their building confidence to
improvise. I analyzed this data using Giorgi’s (2009) descriptive
phenomenological method. The following essential themes emerged from that
analysis – listening, criticism-free environment, sequential experiences, passion
for a style, and openness to learning. The first three of these themes were
considered pedagogical, while the final two themes dispositional.
Summary of “Teaching Confident Music Improvising at Summer Jazz
Camp”4
I tested the essential pedagogical themes that emerged—listening,
criticism-free environment, and sequential experiences—against the situational
reality of the jazz portion of a one-week summer music camp through case study
3 The abstract and link to the full article, The Experience of Confident Music Improvising, is detailed in chapter 2 of this dissertation. 4 The full research report, Teaching Confident Music Improvising at a Summer Jazz Camp, is detailed in chapter 3 of this dissertation.
12
design (Shevock, 2013 February). I conducted interviews with the jazz camp
founder and a past participant, and the primary data were observations of the
classes, which I member checked via email to insure accuracy. Each of the
essential pedagogical themes was directly observable at the camp. Teachers at
this camp taught by posing questions, and teaching through questions emerged as
an additional theme. Through conducting these two studies, my interest in
identifying and categorizing praxes of teachers teaching CMI was beginning to
emerge.
I view these sequenced research studies (The Experience of Confident
Music Improvising, and Teaching Confident Music Improvising at a Summer Jazz
Camp) as substantial pilots to my emerging dissertation research, Praxes for
Confident Music Improvising5, the purpose of which is to understand praxes of
teaching CMI, that is, how expert improvisation teachers conceive the techniques
they use to increase student confidence to improvise music.
Introductory Conclusion
Considering Nachmanovitch’s (1998) concept of improvisation as free
play of consciousness, especially the challenges of obstacles blocking
improvisation, praxis, the challenges to developing creative capacities (Robinson,
2001/11), and the research I have conducted in CMI, exploring CMI teaching
praxes seems important. I approached the following dissertation with this guiding
question – How do effective music improvisation teachers teach students – who
may be unconfident – to confidently improvise music? The present research, by
5 The full research report, Praxes for Confident Music Improvising, is detailed in chapter 4 of this dissertation.
13
discovering praxes of CMI pedagogy, may provide music teachers with music
improvisation pedagogical tools and theory.
14
Chapter 2: The Experience of Confident Music Improvising
ABSTRACT
‘The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Research Studies in Music Education, in-press, by SAGE Publications Ltd, All rights reserved. © Daniel J. Shevock, http://rsm.sagepub.com
Improvisation is a transcendent act that can help students experience
self-liberation, confidence, freedom, and inspiration. However, some
musicians are not confident enough to improvise. Therefore this research
explored the experience of confident music improvising (CMI). In nursing
research, Evans, Bell, Sweeney, Morgan & Kelly (2010) established a
working definition of confidence, “an acquired attribute that provides
individuals with the ability to maintain a positive and realistic perception of
self and abilities” (p. 335). In psychological research, Avni-Babad (2011)
defined confidence in relation to the concepts of safety and comfort. “Safety
precedes confidence, comfort, and well-being, and there is a conceptual
linkage between these feelings” (p. 226). With these definitions in mind, and
through incorporating my own experiences in teaching improvisation, for this
study I defined confidence as: the ability to maintain a positive perception of
self and abilities derived from a feeling of safety.
Since lack of confidence can block musicians, teachers, and students
from improvising, my research questions arose: What is the essence of
confidence in music improvisation? What experiences do confident
improvisers describe as educative? This phenomenological research focused
15
on how experienced improvisers construe notions of confidence, and how
confidence is built. The purpose of this research was to explore the essence of
the experience of confident music improvising.
There is an extensive research tradition that utilizes interviews,
effectually deepening our understanding of the culture of improvisation for
jazz performers (Bailey, 1992; Berliner, 1994; Caudwell, 2010; Dahl, 1984;
MacDonald & Wilson, 2006; Norgaard, 2011; Wilson & MacDonald, 2012).
Phenomenological research obtains essences—prevalent and shared themes—
from data such as interviews (Giorgi, 2009). This study was structured using
Giorgi’s descriptive phenomenological method, which was designed to
examine psychological experiences and Rubin and Rubin’s (2005) responsive
interview process, which extracts deep information from interviewees while
allowing them the freedom to direct the conversations. Wilson and
MacDonald (2012), who have investigated jazz performers extensively,
suggested improvisation research move “beyond particular genres” (p. 570),
and the present study attempted to realize this by investigating the lifeworld
experiences of improvisers from various genres.
Three participants were interviewed, twice each, between December
2011 and January 2012 – a bluegrass and Irish fiddler, a jazz and classical
bassist, and a baroque violinist. Each participant (age 23 to 29) performed as
a semi-professional musician. Observations of performances were also
conducted. Interviews and observations yielded 22 distinct stories depicting
the phenomenon, CMI. The researcher journal was used to reflect on
16
experiences as a confident improviser in relation to the participants’ stories
about CMI. This journal was also used to develop themes. Themes were
winnowed using imaginative variation, and essential themes were those
pertinent to all three participants’ lifeworlds. The final list of essential themes
included: listening, criticism-free environment, sequential experiences,
passion for a style, and openness to learning.
I divided the listening experiences in this study into two categories:
listening to performances and responsive listening. Each participant described
experiences with listening in both categories. Criticism-free environment
included performing music away from the structures of home and school,
without critique, improvising among audiences that were positive and
supportive, and improvising in a free, open environment, where the performer
is not the audience’s focus. Sequential experiences were described by each of
the participants, and allowed them to build confidence over time and through
limited structures. Passion for a style also rose as a theme for these
musicians, as each was passionate about their respective improvisational
tradition. All of the participants demonstrated openness to learning, seeking
out new learning experiences. Three of these themes were viewed as
pedagogical: listening, criticism-free environment, and sequential experiences;
and two of them as dispositional: passion for a style, and openness to
learning.
17
Transition
In The Experience of Confident Music Improvising I asked confident
improvisers to tell me about their experiences learning to become confident at
improvising music. While the essential themes identified might inform
teaching, they were not explicitly teaching themes. Because of my experience
as a music teacher, I was interested in how applicable these themes were to
teaching; my focus moved from learning CMI to teaching CMI. I wanted to
identify a case of improvisation instruction where I could observe the
pedagogical essential themes in action, and could see how these were taught.
18
Chapter 3: Teaching Confident Music Improvising at a
Summer Jazz Camp
Prelude
At the time of this research Hal6 was a university student performing
with multiple jazz ensembles that I had hired for a number of engagements on
tenor saxophone. I view him as a confident and talented jazz musician with a
round tone and a keen sense for crafting interesting, melodic improvisations.
The music camp experience was important to Hal’s development, and he
attended the Mid-Atlantic Summer Music Camp (MASMC) after his 9th and
10th grade years of high school. “I was in one of the combos, which were a
little intimidating because I had never played in a jazz combo before” (Hal,
personal communication, April 3, 2012). After his 11th grade year of high
school, Hal attended a different, jazz only music camp, but MASMC served as
an important channel for him in developing into a confident improviser. Hal
suggested MASMC, “laid a good foundation for me to learn more things
later” (Hal, personal communication, April 3, 2012). Since the camp was one
component in developing his then emerging feeling of confident music
improvising (CMI), I began this study with this question – How do teachers at
MASMC instill students, like Hal, with this feeling of CMI?
6 The names Hal, Dane, Dean, Hunter, Damian, Bens, Clark, Gigi, and the Mid-Atlantic Summer Music Camp are pseudonyms.
19
Introduction
Music improvisation is a diverse, emergent and rich musical
experience. Improvisation has been described as “informal music learning”
(Wright & Kanellopoulos, 2010, p. 72), “a conscious effort to filter musical
input and to form new and meaningful musical configurations” (Della Pietra
& Campbell, 1995, p. 113), responsive to its environment (Bailey, 1992),
“experimental, tolerant of change” (p. 1), free play (Nachmanovitch, 1990),
and “an act of transcendence” (Allsup, 1997, p. 81). Benson (2003) explained
improvisation as fused within composition and performance. In talking about
performance practice as improvisation, Benson stated,
In the musical practice of Medieval, Renaissance, and Baroque music,
there was a significantly different way of conceptualizing music, in
which the principal focus of music making was the performance itself.
The idea of a musical work as an entity that was distinct and
autonomous from the performance simply did not exist. Rather, pieces
of music (to whatever extent they had an identity) were things that
facilitated the activity of music making, not ends in themselves. As a
result, performers and composers were united in a common task,
which meant that there was no clear line of separation between
composing and performing. (p. 22)
Since improvised music composition and performance are interconnected,
improvisation pedagogy might provide unique opportunities to teach music as
a holistic, integrated experience.
20
Because of the nature of improvisation in relation to composition,
music improvisers’ musical decisions seem to be on display more than
performers of written music. Nachmanovitch (1990) writes, “The heart of
improvisation is free play of consciousness… Such play entails a certain
degree of risk” (p. 9). I think instrumental music teachers have an obligation
to teach improvisation as a creative, uplifting and collaborative process,
essential to learning music at all grade levels and in all musical styles.
Many music teachers may be too insecure with improvising to teach
their students to improvise (Beitler & Thornton, 2010; Della Pietra &
Campbell, 1995; Madura Ward-Steinman, 2007). It is easy to imagine a
cascading condition when self-doubting instrumental music teachers
inadvertently pass their own insecurities to the next generation of students.
Instrumental music teachers might avoid improvisation instruction entirely
because they define creativity as “recreating existing repertoire” (Snell, 2013
April, p. 1). Beitler and Thornton suggested anxiety over mistakes factors
into a lack of improvisation confidence and Della Pietra and Campbell stated,
“minimal attention has been given to improvisation training” (p. 113) at the
university level. The secret to fostering a disposition to teach improvisation
among instrumental music teachers may lie in forming a positive creative
identity (Randles, 2009), through sequential experiences and collaborative
play (Della Pietra & Campbell, 1995).
Conversely, some music educators teach improvisation confidently
and effectively (Beitler & Thornton, 2010; Della Pietra & Campbell, 1995;
21
Robinson, Bell & Pogonowski, 2011), and documentation of successful
programs could encourage less experienced teachers to emulate effective
teaching approaches. Because jazz is characterized by its “overwhelming
emphasis on improvisation and the improvising soloist” (Caudwell, 2010, p.
242), I believe that a rigorous study of improvisation in high quality jazz
programs could inform a deeper understanding of how improvisation is taught
and learned. Over time, such understanding might assist in improving
improvisation pedagogy for all teachers. I view jazz as a well-developed
improvising musical culture that music educators at all levels and styles might
emulate some aspects of jazz pedagogy to teach improvisation.
The current study represents a portion of a larger goal of
understanding CMI. In the aforementioned study (Shevock, in-press-a),
listening, sequential experiences, and criticism-free environment emerged
essential pedagogical themes of CMI. Additionally, openness to learning and
passion for a style emerged as essential dispositional themes. In that study a
jazz bassist and skilled improviser characterized jazz camps as fundamental to
the development of his confidence, which in turn he felt was necessary to
improvise. This participant’s experience with jazz camps was later reinforced
when I interviewed the saxophonist Hal, who specifically identified MASMC
as important to his development as an improviser.
With a focus on teachers who are teaching confidence, the present
research hopes to elucidate the essential pedagogical themes of CMI by
locating them in a bounded case. Since “most qualitative research inherently
22
shapes or modifies existing theory” (Merriam, 1998, p. 49), and because little
research has been conducted in CMI, corroborating evidence seems necessary
to illuminate the role of these themes within CMI. If these themes are to be
demonstrated as wide-ranging, they will hold up to the particulars of a case
study, and in a research design in which observation plays a more central data-
collection role. The previous investigation (Shevock, in-press-a) I asked
participants to remember and discuss moments of confidence development.
The current study examines CMI within a learning context (a summer music
camp) through direct observation. Due to a participant’s reference to the
importance of jazz camps, and my interest in pursuing jazz as the medium for
studying improvisation pedagogy, the case I chose was a summer music camp
with a jazz portion.
The music camp I observed offered activities in concert band,
orchestra, choir, piano and jazz for high school students. By observing the
jazz portion of a comprehensive summer music camp, rather than a camp
dedicated solely to jazz, I had the opportunity to observe less experienced,
unconfident student improvisers who possess more familiarity with concert
band or orchestra than jazz. Dane, who founded the jazz portion of this camp
in 1987, reinforced this suspicion in an interview (Dane, personal
communication, April 27, 2012). This camp structure also reinforced that I
might observe unconfident improvisers, as the camp provides jazz
performance and improvisational opportunities to students with “extensive
experience or none at all” ([Mid-Atlantic Public University] Outreach
23
Marketing and Communications, 2011). In this case, I believed less
experienced (with improvisation) high school musicians might be also less
confident – each of my participants in my previous study (Shevock, in-press-
a) described experiences where confidence was an issue connected to learning
more through sequential experiences.
My research questions emerged from considering the essential
pedagogical themes describing the phenomenon of CMI (Shevock, in-press-a),
and through taking into account that many teachers are uncomfortable
teaching improvisation, while many others are self-assured and successful
(Beitler & Thornton, 2010; Della Pietra & Campbell, 1995; Robinson, Bell &
Pogonowski, 2011). The guiding question for this study was, what techniques
do instructors at a jazz portion of a summer music camp use to increase the
confidence of students to improvise music? The purpose of this qualitative
case study was to document CMI techniques used to teach high school
students attending the jazz portion of a summer music camp.
A Qualitative Case Study
To study a phenomenon as a case, the phenomenon must be
“intrinsically bound” (Merriam, 1998, p. 27). I identified the jazz portion of a
summer music camp held at The Mid-Atlantic Public University as the
boundary of this case study and teaching CMI as the phenomenon. The data
sources for this case study were field notes written during observations at the
camp and interviews with a past participant and the jazz camp founder who
taught at the camp. I maintained a research journal throughout this study to
24
increase my awareness of my subjective experience, to formulate interview
questions, and to make sense of my observational field notes. Field note
accuracy was corroborated through member checking via email.
In April 2012, I began my inquiry with two interviews: Hal, a
university engineering major and tenor saxophonist, who studied at the camp
as a freshman and sophomore in high school, and Dane who founded and
directs the jazz portion of the camp. Seidman (2006) indicated, “Interviewing
allows us to put behavior in context and provides access to understanding their
actions” (p. 10). These interviews were loosely formatted to allow the
participants control of the direction of the conversations. I transcribed and
coded these interviews based on the previously identified essential
pedagogical themes for confident improvising (Shevock, in-press-a).
My reflection on these two initial interviews helped to provide context
for the observations. Additionally, I analyzed documents including a method
book on improvisation written by Dane and the webpage promoting the
summer music camp ([Mid-Atlantic Public University] Outreach Marketing
and Communications, 2011). These documents afforded me insight into the
values of the music camp. My analysis of these documents informed my
thinking through the journal writing process, and during observations.
I observed and kept field notes of the jazz portion of the summer
music camp between July 16, 2012 and July 21, 2012. At three points—
during the observations, in the evenings during the camp, and after the camp’s
culmination (through email member checking)—I pinpointed teaching
25
moments where I felt, subjectively, student confidence was bolstered by using
the aforementioned themes (Shevock, in-press-a) and personal valuation. I
coded the data informed by Seidman (2006). The codes reflected the essential
pedagogical themes of listening, criticism-free environment, and sequential
experiences—interview transcriptions (Hal and Dane), field notes, and
member checks (all teachers) were coded as these three themes. An additional
theme, teaching through questions, emerged inductively from the
observational data and was included as a fourth theme. Validity was
maintained through triangulating data – observations, interviews, and
documents – and through member checks.
Framework
The framework I employed during this research was shaped by
Dewey’s (1938/97) continuity of experience. Dewey suggested that education
must be based on experience, and that the quality of experience is measured
by its “connection with further experience” (p. 27). He labeled these
educative experiences “continuity of experience” (p. 28). I chose the jazz
portion of a university summer camp with an eye toward labeling continuous
experiences of CMI. Continuous experiences may be meaningful to these
students because they grew out of previous experiences with improvisation,
and have the opportunity to lead to further experiences. In the prelude, Hal
suggested his experiences at MASMC helped build his confidence.
26
Observations
I interviewed a past MASMC participant Hal, and the founder of the
jazz portion of MASMC Dane in April 2012. During the 5-day MASMC, I
observed three concerts and 17 hour-long class periods. The concerts
included one jazz faculty concert led by Dean, a chamber music concert that
included two student jazz combos, and a jazz concert comprised of three
student big bands. The observed jazz classes at the camp comprised three
sections of improvisation, one section of jazz history, two jazz combos, three
big bands, and two master classes – a jazz percussion and a jazz piano. I
observed a total of five improvisation class periods—three taught by Dane,
and one each by Bens and Hunter—two jazz history/listening periods taught
by Damian, five jazz combo periods taught by Bens and Caesar, three big
band rehearsals taught by Dane, Damian, and Clark, a jazz percussion master
class taught by Caesar and a jazz piano master class taught by Bens. These
observations and supporting documents collected during observations—nine
worksheets handed to students by Dane and Bens, three concert programs—
afforded me the data I used to form this analysis.
Results
In this section I will share a vignette constructed around the experiences of
a student who seemed unconfident with improvising, the instruction that seemed
to help her improve as a confident music improviser, and data from field notes
around the four themes – listening, criticism-free environment, sequential
experiences, and teaching through questions.
27
Gigi
One student in particular, Gigi, seemed to have difficulty with CMI,
and consequently her experience seemed particularly relevant. On the first
day of music camp, Dane divided the students enrolled in improvisation class
into three groups based on prior experience and perceived skill at improvising.
Students who had not “studied improvisation in some way” were grouped into
the first improvisation class. Those who had improvised on a blues scale were
grouped in the second improvisation class taught by Hunter. Those who “can
make sense of a ii-V-I change” were grouped in the advanced improvisation
class, taught by Bens. Dane elected to teach the beginning improvisation
group, which included Gigi, and led this group of students to a large
classroom with desks, a piano and a sound system. He handed out a
worksheet with a pentatonic scale and the circle of 4ths and played a
recording of the accompaniment to St. Thomas, an up-tempo Latin piece.
Each student took a turn improvising.
I recognized Gigi’s difficulty during this first improvisation class.
Students took their turn improvising, but when it came to Gigi, her alto
saxophone was silent. Gigi said, “I don’t understand what we’re doing
exactly.” Dane suggested, “you’re just making things up,” but he could tell
that she seemed particularly nervous. Another student suggested that she
could play, “the notes on the scale,” and Dane replied, “try to make a good
melody. We’ll talk about what makes a good melody throughout the week.
Knowing which scale is one step to learning to improvise.”
28
Throughout the period, Dane kept Gigi engaged by asking her
questions, and keeping her involved in class. The class was filled with
improvisational music on this simple pentatonic scale. Confidence seemed to
be built by doing, and Dane had students improvise over the song’s head (the
form of the song), and trade 4s (each improviser take turns improvising for
four measures). Gigi’s confidence seemed to build throughout the period by
continuing to have the opportunity to improvise.
On the second day of improvisation class, I noticed that Gigi still
seemed nervous and was chewing her nails. She didn’t seem to want to
answer questions. As with many classes, one student was answering most of
the questions, though not always correctly. Dane wasn’t reacting negatively
to incorrect answers and eventually talked directly to Gigi about identifying
the “flat 3” (the third degree of the scale, lowered a half-step). Dane taught
the students a short lick (motif or pattern for improvising), using “flat 3, 3,
and flat 7.” Later that day, I observed Gigi playing in Clark’s big band, which
was the beginning big band. Though the other big bands had a heavy
emphasis on improvisation, Clark spent most of the time I observed him
teaching correct pitches and rhythms, and not improvisation. Because this
was a beginning band, they may have required a great deal of rudimentary
work. Gigi’s big band experience did not seem to reinforce her improvisation
instruction.
I observed Gigi again during Dane’s fifth improvisation class on
Friday. By this class, the conversation had become far more technical, and the
29
students were delving into deeper theoretical concepts around “pentatonics of
choice,” “blue pentatonics,” the “circle of 4ths,” and form. Gigi seemed far
more comfortable than she did early in the week. Her solos sounded
rhythmically and melodically interesting, though it seemed she still hadn’t
internalized the 12-bar blues form – during her first improvisation of the day,
her melodic idea stopped after eight measures. Dane remarked, “You did well
for eight bars, but you have to play the whole 12 bars.” Dane continued to
talk to the class, and his conception of CMI might be summed up in this
statement from our interview, reinforced during the class:
Having confidence in what you do has a lot to do with how much you
know about what it is you’re trying to do. You don’t have to have
something perfected, but if you have a good understanding of how
things are working, you’ll have a good chance to have success. (Dane,
personal communication, April 27, 2012)
Listening
Listening instruction (aural instruction) was part of every class I
observed. Listening specifically to recorded improvisations was included in
Dane’s improvisation class, Bens’s piano master class, and Damian’s jazz
history class. In addition, in all of the classes, teachers directed students to
listen to each other while playing. Caesar and Damian sometimes taught their
ensembles by playing or singing riffs and having students repeat them. For
instance, on the first day of camp, when a trumpeter in Caesar’s jazz combo
didn’t know the G blues scale, Caesar sang it for her and had her find the
30
notes by ear with little expressed reinforcement, i.e. “half-step.” “Listen to it
so much that it becomes natural.”
Damian’s jazz history class, which I observed on Monday and Friday,
provided maybe the clearest example of building vocabulary by listening to
jazz music:
The goal of this class is to listen to some specific things in jazz—
melodic interpretation, earlier decades, and performance practices—to
do this we need to hear jazz. Let’s begin with sound. I’d like to play
something. It’s fair game for you to say anything; it makes me think
of the color purple, or I like the ride cymbal.
On the fifth day of camp, Dane asked his improvisation class, “What is more
important than listening?” One student answered, “practicing,” and Dane
replied, “That might be the only thing, and I’d give them equal importance.”
During jazz history on that same day, Damian told a story about a friend of
his, a classical violinist who was given an assignment to listen to classical
music five or six days a week, three hours a day. Damian tried that for a few
years, and stated, “Whatever success I’ve had, that experience helped most.
I’ve had to sit in on gigs without charts, but I had heard the song before.”
Criticism-Free Environment
Each instructor at the jazz camp fostered a criticism-free environment.
Throughout Caesar’s and Bens’s jazz combos, and Dane’s big band I observed
students given long periods of time to improvise without any instruction.
Instead, each instructor spent this time directly instructing the rhythm section.
31
Letting every student improvise was important to Damian, and he allowed
every student in his big band to improvise at the concert.
Hunter’s improvisation class, which I observed on Wednesday,
provided an especially notable example of criticism-free environment, as he
encouraged students to try “something completely new.” He warned me,
“we’re going to do some pretty weird stuff,” to which I replied, “all the
better!” Hunter had selected Wednesday as an opportunity for students to
explore free improvisation. Hunter asked for a volunteer and the baritone
saxophonist agreed. Hunter continued, “All right. We’re going to play on the
spot, a duet.”
Student, “Do you want to take lead first?”
Hunter, “Let’s not set parameters. Let’s just see what happens. We’ll
just start playing whatever.”
Hunter and the saxophonist began playing their unstructured duet, and
some time passed before the improvisation seemed to work well. At first, the
melodic and rhythmic motifs seemed disjointed, but with a few minutes of
work, the two musicians seemed to find some common ground. Hunter said,
“That’s pretty good, and very good on your part.” As the free improvisation
lesson continued, the saxophonist chose a new partner, and every student had
many opportunities to improvise, creating and responding to each other’s
musical ideas. Students were given complete freedom to choose metric,
rhythmic, harmonic and melodic content without direction from the teacher.
Instead of judging the improvisations directly, when students chose to end
32
their improvisations, Hunter asked them how they felt about what they played.
After the duets, students did the same exercise in trios, which required more
diligent listening and leaving space for other students’ musical ideas.
Sequential Experiences
During the drum set master class, Caesar taught improvisation over a
musical form, and employed a sequential experience. Students seemed to
become more confident at improvising as Caesar expanded the form of the
music, first a 12-bar blues form, then a longer form. Caesar began by playing
a blues form on the bass guitar. The first student took his solo, and
implemented some of the rhythmic motifs Caesar taught earlier in the period.
After he was finished soloing, Caesar asked, “Did you know where the top of
the form was?” By his facial expression and lack of an answer, it seemed the
student did not. As the next student improvised, Caesar had the first student
signal every 12 measures to designate the top of the form. Next, Caesar had
the students listen as he played through a 32 bar form on the bass in a two
feel. Caesar played the form again, this time singing the melody to Autumn
Leaves. The students seemed to build confidence at improvisation over the 32
bar form by repetition, but also because they had already learned the 12 bar
blues.
Throughout the camp, I observed sequentially designed lessons. On
the first day of jazz history course, Damian had students listen to standards by
Ella Fitzgerald, The Original Dixieland Band, Louis Armstrong, Charlie
Parker and Miles Davis (all what I would call traditional jazz greats), and
33
attempt to identify typical rhythmic and melodic traits of jazz. When I
observed the same class on day five, students were listening to Guillermo
Klein, Andy Milne, and Maria João (all more contemporary jazz musicians
who employ what I consider to be more intricate music) and Damian guided
students through the complex ways musicians use that jazz language in the
21st century through referring back to the day one lesson. For instance, when
listening to a track by Klein, Damian asked, “Is it rooted in jazz?” A
conversation about sequentially more complex jazz music had a chance to be
meaningful because students had already had experience with traditional jazz
recordings earlier in the week.
Teaching Through Questions
Throughout the week I observed each of the essential pedagogical
themes of CMI. Instructors also engaged students in conversations by
teaching through questions. “Most educators readily agree that questioning is
an important aspect of teaching and learning” (Hannel, 2009, p. 65), and that
dialogical teaching can keep students engaged in class, and develop
proficiency with language and thinking (Allsup & Baxter, 2004; Scheib,
2012). Because all of the teachers employed teaching through questions, it
emerged as a theme of teaching CMI in this case study. As an example,
during the free improvisation lesson I observed on day three, after a student
guitarist and baritone saxophonist improvised, this conversation among
Hunter, the performers, and two other students – here labeled Student 1 and
Student 2 – seemed meaningful.
34
Hunter, “What was good with that?
Student 1, “I liked the guitar lick.”
Hunter, “Anything else?”
Student 2, “Occasionally they were playing the same notes, and the
notes lined up and harmonized a bit.”
Hunter, “What things could have been better?”
Student 1, “Had they picked a key?”
Hunter, “What about things other than notes, harmony, and chords?”
Baritone saxophonist, “Copying ideas. I was trying to figure out the
‘da, da, da’ section.” This student takes a few seconds to figure out the
melodic motif the guitarist had improvised, and Hunter continues, “What
other things are there?”
Student 1, while the baritone saxophonist is figuring out the guitarist’s
motif, says, “Rests.”
Hunter, “Elaborate. What do rests do in music?”
Student 1, “They pause between the notes.”
Hunter, “leaving space and letting things settle in. When you’re put on
the spot, [often] the first thing you want to do is play a lot of notes.”
Similar conversations were ubiquitous in every class during the camp.
Equal participation in verbal conversations during class may inspire
confidence during musical improvisation, which can require a parallel musical
conversation, shared among students and teachers during class. Teaching
through questions may also promote divergent thinking among students.
35
Webster (1990) suggested, “Creative thinking, then, is a dynamic mental
process that alternates between divergent (imaginative) and convergent
(factual) thinking, moving in stages over time” (p. 28). By dedicating time to
teaching through questions, these teachers may have been allowing space for
convergent (factual) thinking.
Conclusion
In this research, I documented confidence-building experiences that
occurred at the jazz portion of a weeklong summer music camp for high
school musicians. The purpose of this study was to document CMI techniques
used to teach high school students attending the jazz portion of a summer
music camp. I observed each of the essential pedagogical themes of CMI
identified in earlier research (Shevock, in-press-a). The camp instructors put
import on listening activities, and sequential experiences, and modeled a
criticism-free environment. Researchers have identified lack of confidence as
a possible roadblock for teachers to teach improvisation (e.g. Della Pietra &
Campbell, 1995), and consequently, confidence seems evermore vital for
teachers who hope to foster confidence among improvising students.
The guiding question was, what techniques do instructors at the jazz
portion of a summer music camp use to increase the confidence of students to
improvise music? In addition to the essential pedagogical themes of CMI, one
approach I observed throughout the camp was teaching through questions.
Dewey (1909) stated, in some classrooms “the child knows perfectly well that
the teacher and all his fellow pupils have exactly the same facts and ideas
36
before them that he has; he is not giving them anything at all” (p. 34). By
teaching through questions, it seems the students are able to give something to
the class, increasing student ownership of learning, because students are able
to share their values and knowledge. Echoing the nature of teaching through
questions, the same might be said for the act of improvising; musical
improvising is an act of giving and sharing musical values and knowledge.
Findings echo Henley, Caulfield, Wilson, and Wilkinson (2012), who
found their participants “engage in musical dialogue within improvisation and
traditional pieces. This in turn acts as a model for verbal dialogue” (p. 514).
By teaching through questions, teachers and students may seem to be on more
equal footing. Schmidt (2005) suggested, “The nature of teaching and teacher
education is intrinsically related to dialogue and questioning” (p. 7). Like the
very act of teaching through questions, at its best, jazz improvisation
emphasizes listening, reacting, and collaborating rather than the dominance of
a single figure. Further, teaching through questions might promote what
Webster (1990) labeled divergent thinking.
As the present investigation was qualitative in nature, it is not
appropriate to generalize the findings to other jazz teaching and learning
situations. However, these findings might be transferrable, and music
teachers could benefit from trying some of the techniques documented here.
This case study seemed to reinforce the importance of the essential
pedagogical themes of CMI.
37
Transition
After conducting this case study that corroborated the pedagogical
essential themes of CMI in this jazz camp, I conducted a survey of university-
level improvisation teachers (jazz, organ, baroque ensemble, and
improvisation ensemble) and then allowed the seed of CMI to germinate while
I explored some other scholarly interests. These were practicing music
improvisation, democratic teaching practices (arising out of teaching through
questions, a theme in this case), critical race theory, and social philosophy.
From these explorations, I became interested in praxis (described in Chapter
1). Just as the movement from The Experience of Confident Music
Improvising to Teaching Confident Music Improvising at a Summer Jazz
Camp represented my movement in interest from learning CMI to teaching
CMI, in moving from the previous research into Praxes for Confident Music
Improvising, I moved from identifying teaching techniques to identifying
teaching praxes (as ethical practices of music educators).
38
Chapter 4: “A whole lot of people are a whole lot of scared”:
Praxes for Confident Music Improvising
Confidence (and lack of confidence) has been examined in many fields
of study. Generally, confidence can be described using terms such as trust,
belief in oneself, trustworthiness, reliability, self-reliance, and assurance. In
the business world, scholars are concerned about lack of confidence in the
stock market or of consumer spending because of debt (Tett, 2011). In
government, analysts are concerned about confidence in government
programs (Wolak & Palus, 2010) such as education (Loveless, 1997), and in
issues related to other nations, such as whether Iran has ended its nuclear
program (Hollis, 2008). Within education, student confidence is often studied
using Bandura’s social cognitive theory as a lens; e.g. in the context of writing
(Pajares & Johnson, 1994), art education (Jones, 1997) and music education
(Alexander, 2012; Watson, 2010; Wehr-Flowers, 2006). In Bandura’s theory
Confidence is part of self-efficacy, which “is regarded by Bandura’s social
cognitive theory as the most influential arbiter in human agency and helps
explain why people’s behavior may differ markedly even when they have
similar knowledge and skills” (Pajares & Johnson, 1994, p. 313). Each of
these disciplines seems to consider confidence differently, though there is
meaningful overlap.
I have argued that though Bandura’s self-efficacy provides a useful
framework to study confidence as part of music (especially in understanding
39
why people’s behavior may differ markedly in improvising), confidence is
important to improvising music unique from Bandura’s theory, and deserves
inductive and explorative treatment. The current study will also consider
confidence not as part of self-efficacy, but in line with my previous research
on confident music improvising (CMI). In this line of research, self-
perception of confidence is important as it is perceived, or from the
participants’ lifeworlds.
Self-perception of confidence is, as I understand it, confidence. Since,
“Engagement with music can enhance self-perceptions, but only if it provides
positive learning experiences which are rewarding” (Hallam, 2010, p. 282),
student confidence (as a self-perception) in improvised music might be
intrinsically tied to the music being improvised in the classroom. Hamilton
(2000) suggested “stylistic or structural devices” (p. 182) enhance
individuality in improvisation. Teaching CMI might necessarily be teaching
musical style and structure within an improvisational tradition. As Wynton
Marsalis (2008) said, “We have to encourage the students so they’ll get over
that shyness and learn how to speak this language [jazz]” (p. 7). While jazz
and improvisation are often synonymous, jazz is one genre, style, or musical
culture within which improvisation is vitally important. For the current
research, improvisation is understood as, “music that is neither notated nor
composed, and it is integral to a wide variety of music genres, styles, and
cultures” (Hickey, 2015, p. 426). This present research continues the process
40
of illuminating the experience of CMI, grounded in the experiences of
improvisers and improvisation teachers.
Improvising music confidently might be difficult because improvised
music requires the performer to make more choices (of pitches and rhythms)
than they would make in non-improvised music. For Marsalis (2008), the key
to increasing student confidence to improvise jazz music lies in
encouragement.
We have to continue that tradition, which is not to say any and
everything is great, but to say we recognize that each student struggles
in some way. We know when one is lazy or one is working hard, and
we should encourage all of our students to play and make choices,
even when they are not the best choices. Do something. (p. 7)
This focus on a tradition is in line with other improvising traditions, such as
Persian radif, where students learn from a collection of standards (Nettl,
2009). Marsalis seems to connect the tradition (of jazz, a group musicking
activity) to individual meaning making. Marsalis continues by connecting
confidence with “personal identity” and “hearing in the moment” (p. 8).
Because we hear in the moment with others, identity is formed during group
improvisation in jazz. Marsalis’s insights might provide a lens to interpret
empirical research and is consistent with Burnard (2002), who found “Group
improvisation provides opportunities for children to confer meaning on their
creativity, to connect and interact in ways that uniquely develop a social and
musical sense of self” (p. 169). Such an improvising identity might be built
41
collaboratively, specifically through self-reflection (May, 2003) or
collaborative reflection (Beitler, 2012). Beitler’s research found collaborative
reflection particularly effective for woodwind students.
Survey research has provided our field with much insight into
confidence in musical improvisation (Alexander, 2012; Bernhard, 2013;
Bernhard, 2014; Madura Ward-Steinman, 2007; Wehr-Flowers, 2006). Music
teachers may not value creative music making (improvisation and
composition) as highly as they do other learning activities (Strand, 2006;
Stringham, Thornton & Shevock, 2013 September). Band directors in New
York seem to support improvisation instruction (Schopp, 2006), but many
university-level band teachers do not include improvisation instruction in
instrumental methods courses (Stringham, Thornton & Shevock, 2013
September). Band directors may feel unprepared to teach improvisation. As
Burnard (2002) said, “Many teachers are reluctant to explore group
improvisation” (p. 168).
Using the 1994 NAfME standards as a basis, Madura Ward-Steinman
(2007) shared two studies. She surveyed vocal jazz workshop participants (n
= 213) to describe their confidence in teaching improvisation and then
undergraduates (n = 13) who participated in a six-week vocal jazz course to
see if their confidence would increase from instruction. In the author’s first
survey, participants’ confidence was less in teaching the high school standards
than the elementary school standards. The participants rated their confidence
to improvise as low, but were interested in learning more about how to teach
42
improvisation. In the second study, participants in the vocal jazz course
increased their teaching confidence.
The role of music teachers in students’ improvisation learning has
been examined, and barriers to music teacher involvement have been
identified. Using Madura Ward-Steinman’s (2007) survey categories as a
basis for his study, Bernhard (2013) described undergraduate music education
majors’ confidence in teaching improvisation. There were differences in
confidence to teach improvisation based on students’ year in school and
primary instrument area. While these participants were not particularly
confident in their ability to improvise, they were interested in learning how to
teach improvisation. In seeming contrast with Madura Ward-Steinman and
Bernhard’s research, Koutsoupidou’s (2005) survey of English primary
classroom teachers found mostly positive perceptions; but teachers without
personal experiences improvising had lower positive perceptions.
Gender and CMI seem to relate to each other in complex ways. Wehr-
Flowers (2006) and Alexander (2012) conducted surveys exploring the
relationship between gender and confidence to improvise jazz music. Wehr-
Flowers (2006) found females were less confident, and have less self-efficacy
in jazz improvisation. However Alexander (2012), who used Wehr-Flowers’s
questionnaire, found confidence levels were not significantly different
between female and male participants. Considering that gender and CMI
relate to each other in complex ways, I wanted to explore this issue
qualitatively. I have found exploring gender differences in CMI difficult. In
43
my research of a jazz camp (Shevock, 2013 February; see chapter 3), I noticed
that the camper who appeared least confident was female. I observed her to
see if the teacher was able to improve her observed confidence levels with
improvisation, but I found little conclusive evidence. Still, these findings
were tentative and inconclusive. My exploration of gender in CMI continues
in the present research.
Experimental research has been employed to explore confidence
(operationalized within Bandura’s social cognitive theory) in music
improvisation (Watson, 2010). That author’s participants were divided into
two groups using identical instructional material; one group received notated
instruction and the other aural instruction. Those in the aural instruction
group showed significantly larger gains than those in the notation instruction
group.
Elliott and Silverman (1995/2015) suggested, “Praxis is guided by an
informed and ethical disposition to act rightly—musically, socially,
communally, and so forth—with continuous concern for protecting and
advancing human creativity” (p. 44, emphasis in original). I believe teachers
who are concerned with developing students’ confidence to improvise are
making an ethical choice. Because of this focus on the musicing educators’
concern, and Regelski’s (1998) distinction between praxis and mere teche (in
the present research, understood as teaching techniques) to understand
improvisation teachers’ praxes, it is important to understand teachers’
conceptions of their teaching CMI.
44
Defining Confident Music Improvising
The body of research into confidence in music improvisation examines
teachers’ confidence in teaching improvisation (Madura Ward-Steinman,
2007; Bernhard, 2013), the level of student improvisers’ confidence (Watson,
2010), and issues of gender in improvisation (Alexander, 2012; Wehr-Flower,
2006). My own research explored how confident improvisers build
confidence (Shevock, in-press-a), how students might learn confidence
(Shevock, 2013 February), and both how university improvisation teachers
experience confidence and teach students to be confident improvisers
(Shevock, 2013 November). However, when I conducted those studies, the
distinction between the various ways confidence affects music improvising
was unclear. How teachers build their confidence to teach improvisation, how
improvisers build confidence to improvise, and how teachers teach CMI are
distinct categories. I learned through conducting research, and developed an
interest in CMI as a learning experience among performers (Chapter 2), and
teachers teaching students to become confident music improvisers (Chapter
3). As I operationalized CMI, my research moved me toward an
understanding of the importance of praxes improvisation teachers use to build
students’ confidence to improvise. I have looked at confidence inductively,
and therefore I have come to understand it through the subjective experiences
of my participants. For this study, I define CMI within those parameters – as
people building a personal, subjective sense of confidence needed to
improvise music.
45
Focus
Some of my most powerful experiences with music have been through
improvising, but improvising was not a large part of my own music education.
Confidence is important to performing improvised music (Shevock, 2013
November). I have come to view confidence as a building block to
improvisation. If musicians are confident, their improvisations might be
good, but if they lack confidence they will never make an attempt to
improvise. As my teaching career progressed, my view of my role as an
instrumental music teacher advanced, beginning with a view of instrumental
music teaching as teaching students to read music, produce quality tone on
instruments, and experience traditional band or orchestra literature. I still
believe these are all important, but not enough. My view of music teaching
evolved to include facilitating student creativity through jazz improvisation.
When we music in school we ritualize ideal relationships about the world
(Small, 1998).
In my own teaching, by facilitating student creativity through jazz
improvisation, a new set of relationships, where student voice mattered, were
ritualized. Through research into confident music improvisation, I realized
CMI is experienced as a multifaceted and complicated matter. Since CMI is a
subjective experience, identity, gender, and experiences with others all seem
to be important to CMI. Some teachers are able to help students become
confident music improvisers, even when these students begin unconfident in
their skills. In previous research, I observed a jazz camp instructor help a
46
student improve her confidence during the week (Shevock, 2013 February).
Guiding my thought process, as my scholarship focused on CMI, I had some
general questions. What teaching praxes do successful improvisation teachers
use to improve confidence? The focus of my research is teaching praxes of
CMI, and is guided by the question, how do music teachers teach students to
become confident music improvisers?
Locus
To build themes of praxes used by improvisation teachers to build, in
students, CMI, it is vital to identify knowledgeable participants. As Rubin
and Rubin (2012) stated, “The essence of responsive interviewing is picking
people to talk to who are knowledgeable, listening to what they have to say,
and asking new questions based on the answers they provide” (p. 5).
Therefore it is critical that participants in the current research came highly
recommended as expert improvisation teachers.
Purpose and Research Questions
The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand praxes of
teaching CMI, that is, how expert improvisation teachers conceive the
techniques they use to increase student confidence to improvise music. For
this research a deeper inquiry into teaching praxes, especially those of expert
improvisation teachers, was needed. There were two research questions.
What teaching praxes do participants use to help unconfident students become
confident music improvisers? How does student gender affect teaching
praxes?
47
Method
To obtain robust, qualitative data of praxes of CMI, Rubin and
Rubin’s (2012) responsive interviewing design was used. Interviewing has
long been used to study jazz improvisation (Bailey, 1992; Berliner, 1994;
Caudwell, 2010; Dahl, 1984; MacDonald & Wilson, 2006; Norgaard, 2011;
Sawyer, 1992; Sidran, 1992; Wilson & MacDonald, 2012). Responsive
interviewing involves asking participants three types of questions – main
questions, probes, and follow-up questions. “Main questions address the
overall research problem and structure the interview; probes help manage the
conversation and elicit detail; and follow-up questions explore and test ideas
that emerge during the interviews” (pp. xv-xvi). This research design is
notable because the “stages of research” (p. xvi) are interconnected, and
because, as the authors suggest, responsive interviewing provides a model for
seeing the world, not merely a method for collecting data. One reason I chose
Rubin and Rubin’s responsive interviewing was because I successfully used
an earlier edition of this design to explore CMI (Shevock, in-press-a). The
initial interview protocol began with me asking participants to tell about a
student they helped to become more confident at improvising music. I then
asked probes to build on that story and elicit the praxes the teacher used.
Since this research follows my previous research in CMI, scripted probes were
48
crafted and asked at the end of the interview around the themes of my
previous research.7
Theoretical Sampling
Interview participants were selected using triangulation, theoretical
sampling, and snowball sampling. Glesne (2011) suggested the researcher
employing theoretical sampling, “Selects cases, people, events, activities, etc.
through evolving theoretical constructs in one’s research” (p. 45). The initial
pool of participants was selected for their expert opinion. Triangulation is a
form of “convergent validation” (Decrop, 1999, p. 158) that is, “above all a
state of mind, which requires much creativity from the researcher. The search
for convergence is the motto, in order to make propositions more sound and
valid” (p. 160). To fulfill the proposition that my core participants were
expert improvisation teachers, I used triangulation, I asked improvisation
teachers whose work I am familiar with to suggest core participants. I then
asked two other improvisation teachers familiar with the core participants’
work if they agreed that the selected participants were expert improvisation
teachers.
The two selected core participants were interviewed twice. During
interviews with the core participants, I used snowball sampling to find other
expert improvisation teachers (improvisation teachers who the core participant
respected as expert) and negative cases (improvisation teachers who teach
7 These include the essential themes – listening, criticism-free environment, sequential experiences, passion for a style, and openness to learning – teaching through questions, and the process themes – knowledge about music, playing with authority, and fluency. It included questions on gender.
49
improvisation differently). Additional participants were chosen based on
theoretical questions, which arose during interviews, based on issues that
needed more explanation, clarification, breadth or depth – I interviewed a
guitar teacher, a piano improvisation specialist, a high school orchestra
teacher who employs improvisation pedagogy, and two university students.
New participants were selected until data was saturated. Rubin and
Rubin (2012) stress the importance of sampling with an eye toward emerging
conclusions being balanced and thorough. The authors stated, “You do not
need a vast number of interviewees to demonstrate balance and thoroughness
so long as you show that you have explored alternative points of view and
evaluated them carefully” (p. 63). In this sampling method, sampling, data
collection, and data analysis are intertwined. Because of the nature of
theoretical sampling, it was impossible to identify the number of participants
before the research began. Various points of view were sought by selecting
participants from various backgrounds – jazz, piano, and orchestra. Field
notes were kept on the researcher’s personal computer and member checked
with the participant via email.
Data Collection
Core participants were interviewed twice; second interviews allowed
the researcher to craft follow-up questions (Rubin & Rubin, 2012), refine
analysis and provide prolonged engagement with participants. Interviews
were conducted in person or via telephone. Data analysis (described below)
was done after every interview. As Rubin and Rubin (2012) said, “Each time
50
you come up with a possible explanation, to ensure that your research is
thorough you need to look for further examples, evidence, and refinements
and, in doing so, test and modify your emerging theme. Sometimes, you
simply ask your interviewees how they respond to your ideas” (p. 63).
Interview protocols were emergent – deigned after previous interviews were
analyzed. Data was organized using mp4 video clips (of the audio) and
Microsoft Word documents labeled using participant pseudonyms and
interview date. These documents were stored in folders labeled as each
interview date. As themes were developed, an observation of a core
participant was arranged, which helped provide triangulating data. Additional
triangulating data included publications by two of the participants; online
teaching videos by one of the participants, and teaching materials provided in-
person by one participant.
Data Analysis
Data analysis began with the first interview, by keeping a reflective
field log throughout the research process to make sense of interview data,
observation data, and emerging themes. The reflective field log provided
further research trustworthiness by clarifying researcher bias. Describing the
vital nature of reflective writing to data analysis, Glesne (2011) said,
By writing memos to yourself or keeping a reflective field log, you
develop your thoughts; by getting your thoughts down as they occur,
no matter how preliminary or in what form, you begin the analysis
51
process… Writing helps you think about your work, and about new
questions and connections (p. 189).
The reflective field log provided a mode for codes and themes to emerge
throughout the study and help me “remain open to new perspectives, new
thoughts” (Glesne, 2011, p. 189). With each interview, I began grouping data
into descriptive codes, which summarize “in a word or short phrase – most
often as a noun – the basic topic of a passage of qualitative data” (Saldaña,
2009). The initial codes were constructed in a Microsoft Word document that
labeled when each code occurred on the audio recording and segmented the
recording for transcription (See Table 4.1: Sample Interview Segments).
Segments were then transcribed and recoded.
The descriptive codes were grouped into larger themes, which were
winnowed to find the central themes of praxes of CMI. Since Rubin and
Rubin’s (2012) responsive interviewing design was used, thematic coding was
appropriate. Using Rubin & Rubin’s design as an example, Saldaña (2009)
suggested, “Theming the Data is perhaps more applicable to interviews and
participant-generated documents and artifacts, rather than researcher-
generated field notes” (p. 141).
The early codes and themes influenced the questions asked during
subsequent interviews. In this type of analysis structure, the researcher
interweaves data collection, with data analysis, with writing. The time frame
of the study (October 20, 2014 to December 26, 2014), and number of
interviews (twelve) emerged during the study and continued until theoretical
52
saturation was reached. Theoretical saturation “means that successive
examination of sources yields redundancy and that the data you have seem
complete and integrated” (Glesne, 2011, p. 193). Because previous research
had identified female students as possibly less-confident than male students
(Alexander, 2012; Wehr-Flowers, 2006), participants were asked about gender
issues for their students, and if they had different techniques based on gender.
Participants
Sampling techniques were chosen with the focus on understanding
praxes for CMI. With the aim set, triangulation of expertise, snowball, and
theoretical sampling techniques were employed. There were ten participants
(see Table 4.2: Participant Information Pseudonyms). Hank8 and Damian
were identified as core participants, triangulated as expert improvisation
teachers, and were interviewed twice. At the time of this research, both core
participants were well-known jazz performers, clinicians and composers.
Hank has taught high school and university jazz bands, and Damian taught at
a liberal arts university in Pennsylvania. Three participants, Julian, Margery,
and Geraldo, were recommended by Hank and agreed to participate in this
research (Snowball Sampling). Julian was a doctoral student in California
who taught a university-level jazz band and performed professionally on the
saxophone. Margery taught jazz and improvisation in Iowa, and Geraldo
taught at a university in Virginia.
8 The names Hank, Hunter, Harper, Luc, Julian, Damian, Henri, Margery, Heath and Geraldo are pseudonyms.
53
Five participants – Hunter, Harper, Luc, Henri, and Heath – identified
through theoretical sampling agreed to participate in this research. Hunter
taught a university-level jazz band and guitar, and was sought because of a
participant’s description a culture of improvisation around guitar. Harper was
sought because of her expertise as a piano improvisation specialist. She was a
doctoral student. Luc was sought to provide potential negative case analysis,
as he was a high school teacher in North Carolina who taught improvisation
(but not jazz improvisation) to strings students. Henri and Heath were chosen
because they were students in the improvisation class Hank taught – Henri
seemed confident with improvisation and Heath seemed less confident (see
Figure 4.1: Sampling Chart). Margery and Harper were identified as female
participants. I asked the core participants to identify an expert female
improvisation teacher I might interview; Hank identified Margery. I knew
Harper prior to the research, and personally identified her as an expert
improvisation teacher. Two participants, Damian and Hunter, were
participants in my previous research (see Chapter 3 of this dissertation),
helping me further assess their expertise as improvisation instructors.
Trustworthiness
Trustworthiness was addressed through clarification of researcher bias,
prolonged engagement, triangulation, negative case analysis, and rich, thick
description. To member check, interview transcripts were emailed to
participants, who verified their words were accurately represented, and added
ideas they missed during the interview. To triangulate, this study used
54
interviews, documents (online information about the participants, online
pedagogical documents, publications, and teaching materials), and an
observation.
Results
The central theme of this research was aural instruction. Cultures of
improvisation, simplifying structures, compositional thinking, and free
improvisation were themes in relation to the central theme. Each of these
themes as praxis was connected to the central theme, aural instruction.
Smaller themes of praxes of CMI were teaching through questions, time,
visuals & technology. Other themes explored in this research were gender,
and safe environment.
Central Theme: Aural Instruction
Each participant employed aural instruction as a teaching practice
aimed at improving student CMI. As a theme, aural instruction connects to
the essential theme of CMI, listening (Shevock, in-press-a). Where listening
activities arose as how emerging performers experienced confidence, aural
instruction represents how expert improvisation teachers teach confidence.
There were differences among the participants in how they used and thought
about aural instruction, and also in the extent to which aural instruction was
emphasized.
55
Observation Notes: Improvisation Instruction for Music
Education Undergraduates.
In a large university marching band rehearsal room, with concrete
floor and flags of conference sports opponents high on the wall, a
recording of a woman’s voice, piano accompaniment and tenderly
brushed drums resonates softly below the rustle of musicians pulling
instruments out of cases, adjusting chairs and stands, and talking softly
to each other. Visual and aural stimuli seem at odds on this cold
December morning. Senior music education undergraduates, whose
focus is elementary and middle or high school band education, are
opening their instrument cases as an expert improvisation teacher,
Hank, is holding his saxophone preparing to teach. The three course
instructors invited Hank to teach a session on improvisation for the
senior capstone class. These undergraduates will be student teaching
next semester. Eleven students and two graduate assistants are also in
the room. The instrumentation provides an interesting and unusual
assortment for jazz – flutes, saxophones, trumpets, euphoniums,
French horns, bassoons, and a vibraphone. After making sure
everyone is playing their primary instruments, Hank begins playing
short phrases for imitation. After some time of imitation, Hank says,
“Now instead of playing what I play, just play what comes next,” and
begins leading them in a call/response activity, using The Twelve Days
of Christmas in multiple keys. Hank hopes to get a sense for the
56
students’ aural skills. To me, the students seem to be having quite a
bit of difficulty with this activity. (Observation notes, December 8,
2014)
I interviewed two of the students in this class after the observation. A jazz
saxophonist, Henri was perhaps the most experienced improviser in the class,
and Heath, a tuba player, had much less experience improvising. Consistent
with Gruenhagen and Whitcomb (2014), who found teachers discussed the
importance of sequencing students’ improvisation learning, Heath expressed
appreciation for Hank’s sequence of instruction. Henri felt Hank’s teaching
approach was useful because of Hank’s emphasis on aural instruction.
Some people say you should talk about theory right away. With his
approach, I like it because it’s not necessarily waiting for anything.
Essentially, it gets [students] improvising. It gets them audiating what
they’ve heard and putting it into music, because (.) they sing it and
then they play it. (Henri, personal communication, December 10,
2014)
For Hank, aural instruction was the primary way he taught CMI. “The
objective [of my teaching approach] is just to get them playing off of the
page” (Hank, personal communication, October 20, 2014). In Watson’s
(2010) research, aural instruction was described as instruction received
“primarily through aural imitation” (p. 245), and was positioned in contrast
with notated instruction. For this current study, then, aural instruction is
57
defined in contrast to notated instruction (having students play off of the page
/ without notated music) and consists of aural imitation teaching activities.
Themes connected to aural instruction include culture of
improvisation, simplifying structures, compositional thinking, and free
improvisation. Improvisation instruction also included listening to expert
models, often by directing the student to listen to recordings of improvisation
experts. Further, students who have good aural skills may be more likely to
have an easier time with improvising music. For instance, at his university,
Damian finds few students who enter his ensembles to be confident at
improvising music, but those who are confident are so because of their ability
to “hear.”
That tends to come with people who can hear and can identify,
accurately and quickly, music, and can therefore hear with less
coaching what’s going on in music that they like and can replicate it.
But that’s a small minority. The majority of people are not so strong
in the realm of ear training and really need some coaching and to be
shown a slowed-down version early on. (Damian, personal
communication, November 7, 2014)
It seems, at the very least, aural development makes improvisation instruction
easier. As Hank’s vignette illustrates, music education undergraduates seem
to need more aural instruction.
Culture of Improvisation. There seems to be a culture of
improvisation around certain instruments – in particular drums, guitar, and
58
saxophone. Hank was the first participant who suggested drums and guitar
have a culture of improvisation, where students are immersed in aural
instruction when they begin lessons, and that this culture helps them become
more confident improvisers. Julian (personal communication, November 6,
2014) suggested there is also a culture of improvisation with the saxophone.
The piano specialist I interviewed, Harper, had experience with many styles of
music, and connected the culture of improvisation to aural instruction.
Playing by ear is a big part of [improvisation for drummers and
guitarists]. You will have experienced music where not every note
was dictated to you, and that it worked, it sounded good, and you had a
good time (Harper, personal communication, November 5, 2014)
Harper connected the culture of improvisation, through playing by ear to a
sense of enjoyment (“a good time”) and agency9. Since praxis is defined as
“reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it” (Freire,
1970/93, p. 51), it is through the development of agency that aural instruction
becomes a teaching praxis. The aim of aural instruction seems to provide
students with “tools” (a word used by many participants) to improvise,
creating their own music.
Negatively, a culture of improvisation that is focused too much on
aural instruction at the cost of music literacy can hinder students. A guitarist
and jazz band instructor, Hunter suggested,
9 In this research “agency” is defined as belief in oneself that one can change the world (musical world in this instance, through improvisation), i.e. as “agents” in the world, and not mere objects acted upon with no control.
59
Some guitar players come to the audition and they don’t do very well.
Here’s the chart. Here’s what you’re supposed to do with the chords.
And they can’t do it. Some guitar players get into the band and they
can struggle for a little bit because they’re just not used to that
environment of handing out music. (Hunter, personal communication,
October 22, 2014)
A jazz bassist, singer, and improvisation instructor, Margery, recommended
learning music theory and music literacy along with aural instruction,
modeled on early language learning. “Theory is looking at music that is great
and figuring out why it is great” (Margery, personal communication,
December 16, 2014). It may be detrimental to CMI to introduce theoretical
concepts too early, but failing to introduce them might also delay student
improvisational development.
Simplifying Structures. The theme, simplifying structures, was
constructed from the subthemes starting with the known, imitation, and
sequential experiences. An example of starting with the known, Hank has
beginning jazz band students improvise “in a rock beat because it speaks their
language” (Hank, personal communication, October 20, 2014), and Luc has
orchestra students improvise to a well-known folk tune, “Simple Gifts –
something every string player in the world has done” (Luc, personal
communication, November 6, 2014). Many of these improvisation teachers
begin with imitation (call and echo) activities and then move to
60
question/answer (call and response) activities to increase student confidence
to improvise.
One thing I love to do with beginning improvising is to do full-on
aural instruction, where I play then you play an imitation. And then
after the students get really good at imitating what their instructor has
played, then do more of what I would call an antecedent/consequent
relationship, where I make a musical statement and then they make a
response to that statement that is similar in mode but more of a
variation rather than a full on improvised tune. (Luc, personal
communication, November 6, 2014)
Luc’s statement shows that sequential experiences, an essential theme that
arose in my previous research (Shevock, in-press-a), are a key component to
aural instruction. Further, that early imitation and call/response activities
provide a scaffold for students’ later “full-on” improvisation.
Compositional Thinking. The theme compositional thinking was
made up of the codes palette, and rhythm. For Damian, who believes “a
whole lot of people are a whole lot of scared when they start improvising”
(personal communication, November 7, 2014), his approach could be
described as simplifying structures and scaffolding onto those to develop a
sense of compositional thinking. He suggested students are unconfident,
Because they’ve been given too broad a palette of tools with which to
improvise or because they haven’t been given any tools, so they lack a
very specific and finite collection of tools that will get them started,
61
which won’t overwhelm thought and creativity. (Damian, personal
communication, December 21, 2014)
To develop compositional thinking, then, Damian recommends building from
simplified structures (these themes were interconnected) and help students
develop a broader palette of tools. This was in line with Harper, who said, “I
think that what I’m really teaching them is a way to organize their thinking, to
plan and process ideas” (Harper, personal communication, November 5,
2014). The palette of tools discussed might include developing comfort with
dissonances. For Geraldo, it is important to help young improvisers become
“comfortable with all of the wrong notes” (Geraldo, personal communication,
December 26, 2014). This is a compositional thinking issue because students
learn not just to become comfortable with dissonances, but also to resolve
them. Geraldo then teaches students how to resolve any “wrong” note they
may play during the improvisation.
Free Improvisation. Many participants employ free improvisation,
and even those who suggested they did not early in the interview, considered
free improvisation activities beneficial to develop CMI in certain situations.
Many participants had difficulty defining free improvisation, which may
account for the varied responses. For some participants free improvisation
was a pedagogical tool, and for others it was a genre of music, an offshoot of
Ornette Coleman’s free-jazz style. For instance, Margery initially said she did
not employ free improvisation, but after considering it, she admitted she
would turn off the lights and have the students improvise to “broaden their
62
palette” (Margery, personal communication, December 16, 2014), which
connects this theme to compositional thinking. Inspired by Hickey’s (2015)
research, free improvisation was understood as a group (at times a group of 2)
improvisation that is non-idiomatic, with few- or no-rules, and both a
pedagogical technique and a genre in its own right. For the present research,
free improvisation as a pedagogical technique, and not as a genre, was of
interest. This was because participant descriptions of free improvisation were
pedagogical – teaching students to improvise.
Free improvisation activities can be used to show how music is
dialogue, and involves constructing a story. For instance, Geraldo does free
improvisation with a group of students, allowing for a “safety in numbers
approach” (Geraldo, personal communication, December 26, 2014), and
gradually cut students out until fewer and fewer students are improvising.
When I teach free improvisation, and cut it down two students, then
one student, when it becomes one person they eventually realize,
“Even when I’m playing by myself it is dialogue. I’m playing
something and asking myself what I want to hear next. I’m having a
conversation with myself.” (Geraldo, personal communication,
December 26, 2014)
Geraldo’s focus on improvising as dialogue seems to support Sawyer’s (1992)
discussion of jazz within the context of a “dialogic nature of the interaction
among the coperformers” (p. 255). Geraldo, however, extends this concept of
dialogue to include, even, solo improvising. Free improvisation can also be
63
used in private lessons. “We’ll play free duets in lessons. They’ll play
something and I’ll play in a way that shows them I’m listening and supporting
it either rhythmically, or outlining some kind of harmonic aspect, or building a
melody” (Julian, personal communication, November 6, 2014). Julian
connects this free improvisation activity to compositional thinking, connecting
these themes to aural instruction more broadly.
Teaching Through Questions, Time, and Visuals & Technology
The three themes, teaching through questions, time, and visuals &
technology, were smaller themes of praxes of CMI. In the instance of
teaching through questions, and time, these themes were part of participants’
conversations, though often not the focus of the discussions around
confidence. In the case of Technology, it was discussed quite a bit by one
participant, but not by others. Teaching through questions was an emergent
theme of the case study of a jazz camp (see chapter 3 of this dissertation). It
was also a theme in the current research. In their interviews, participants
described instances when they posed questions to students. Because this
theme was treated heavily in the previous research, I will not deal with it
extensively here.
Time was a theme of praxes of CMI. Most of these teachers dedicated
significant amounts of time to improvisation activities, especially in
comparison to less-expert improvisation teachers. “It was worth devoting an
atypical amount of rehearsal time on improvisation. I was willing to sacrifice
some polish and shine in order to get this. Frankly, I felt it was actually a net
64
gain” (Hank, personal communication, October 20, 2014). These findings
were consistent with Kennedy (2000), who suggested creativity requires “time
and space… to bloom” (p. 133). These teachers may have been successful in
developing student confidence because they devoted time to improvisation
activities.
Visuals & Technology was another theme of praxes of CMI.
Participants described visuals including hand symbols, handouts, and what
they write on the board to support student improvising. Luc utilizes
technology, including sound effects to inspire early improvisation. He has
students “fool around” with major scales and a delay pedal.
I use an electric violin and a delay pedal that has about a 1-second
delay. With a nice, long delay, you can create extemporaneous
canons. I use this technique because I began improvising this way, by
fooling around with electric violins and electronics. I really believe
the biggest pitfall is people trying to do too much, too quickly. (Luc,
personal communication, November 6, 2014)
This was in line with my previous research (Shevock, in-press-c), in which I
found technology was able to support jazz improvisation instruction, and in
another study (Shevock, 2014, April) exploring how improvisers used
technology to support music practice.
Gender
Gender was an important issue related to CMI for some of the
participants. Recruitment, and role models were the two themes of gender.
65
Societal Expectations is a theme that was discussed extensively by some
female participants, but was not identified as a teaching praxis (see Narrative
4.1: Societal Expectations). However, each of these teachers suggested
gender does not change teaching praxes. Participants pointed out that
teaching practices were tailored to individual students strengths and
weaknesses. For instance, when asked if gender affected teaching practices,
Hank suggested, “I try not to worry about if a student is a boy or a girl when
I’m talking to them. They fall somewhere on the confidence continuum, and I
try to speak to them where they are” (Hank, personal communication, October
20, 2014). Damian changes teaching praxes based on instrument. As he
stated, “If it becomes instrument specific, I’ve had more female students who
sing, and we do different things if you’re a singer. But it doesn’t matter if
you’re a man or a woman singer” (Damian, personal communication,
November 7, 2014). While instrument may suggest gender in general, gender
itself is not a deciding factor for these teachers in how to teach students.
Two female participants (Harper and Margery) and one male
participant (Julian) talked more extensively about gender issues in jazz
improvisation. Julian (and other participants such as Hank, Damian, Margery,
and Luc) pointed out that, traditionally, fewer women participate as men in
jazz, which can be a problem because, “they’re massively outnumbered and
that makes them very insecure, because they don’t have the support of other
girls” (Julian, personal communication, November 6, 2014). Julian’s
approach to improving female improvisers’ confidence involved increased
66
recruitment of women into his university and high school jazz ensembles.
This is in line with McKeage’s (2014) research, which found, “Encouraging
girls to play jazz should begin in the elementary grades. Students should be
encouraged to explore instrument choices outside the traditional sex
stereotypes” (para. 43).
Through her long career as a jazz teacher and performer, Margery, and
her sister who is a jazz teacher in California, have served as “role models” for
her female and male students.
There really were some good ole boy band directors back in the day,
who were convinced that girls couldn’t play as well as boys… it
wasn’t our goal to set out to be role models, but we were role models
for young women as well as we were for all the young men that came
to study with us. They don’t have any qualms or questions about the
fact that women jazz players know a lot and can play well. (Margery,
personal communication, December 16, 2014)
These findings are in line with McKeage (2014), who, in her qualitative
research, found female role models to be essential to mentoring students.
Safe Environment
Safe environment had two themes, games and peers. Building a safe
environment, of “cooperation, support, and trust” (Elkind, 1975, p. 3) is
important in theatre improvisation education, and criticism-free environment
was an essential theme of CMI (Shevock, in-press-a). Margery suggested it is
important to make improvisation activities “a fun game,” where it is “okay to
67
make mistakes” (Margery, personal communication, December 16, 2014). In
theatre, games are used to develop a safe environment. As Madson (2005)
suggested, “Playing with consideration and kindness promotes a sense of
security. This is necessary when we are doing crazy, risky things – it is
essential during chaos. Competition is replaced by cooperation” (p. 131).
Among the expert music improvisation teachers in the current study, a safe
environment was fostered to harness the positive power of peers. As Hank
suggested, “They don’t want to suck in front of their peers” (Hank, personal
communication, October 20, 2014), and Geraldo pointed out the importance
of creating a “safe environment” by addressing “what they fear the most”
(Geraldo, personal communication, December 26, 2014). Participants
mentioned a danger of students showing off. Peers could also be used to
support unconfident students. “It’s a trusting and safe environment. And at
the same time, I try not to take the kids I know who can really play and let
them play these 24-bar solos, because all that does is reinforce to the kids who
are new at it that they stink” (Hank, personal communication, October 20,
2014). Contrastingly, Heath suggested,
Henri just goes for it. That gives me confidence, knowing if he’s just
going to go for it, and he’s going to play all sorts of things, I can sit
right underneath him, or with him, and play whatever I think is good.
(Heath, personal communication, December 17, 2014)
68
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to understand praxes of teaching
CMI, that is, how expert improvisation teachers conceive the techniques they
use to increase student confidence to improvise music. In looking at these
expert improvisation teachers’ praxes for developing CMI, the central theme
was aural instruction, which included themes culture of improvisation,
simplifying structures, compositional thinking, and free improvisation. The
themes gender and safe environment were explored, as well as smaller themes
teaching through questions, time, and visuals & technology.
There were two research questions addressed in this study. What
teaching praxes do participants use to help unconfident students become
confident music improvisers? How does student gender affect teaching
praxes? The emphasis on aural instruction among the participants in this
study is in line with Watson (2010), who suggested, “Educators should
strongly consider the incorporation of aural imitation tasks and exposure to
exemplary models into their improvisation teaching methodologies” (p. 250).
These expert improvisation teachers employed aural instruction heavily in
their teaching praxes. The theme culture of improvisation, especially around
guitar, drums, and saxophone, may align with Lucy Green’s (2008) research
on informal learning through popular music. Guitar and drums, at least, are
the primary instruments in popular music ensembles. Green suggested a
connection between popular music and confidence. “Playing popular music in
a band tends to raise the self-esteem and the perceived peer group status of the
69
participants” (p. 9). Perhaps this self-esteem leads to confidence at
improvising music, a confidence of guitar students that my participants
perceived.
The theme simplifying structures seems to point toward an
instructional scaffolding process, “the process of controlling task elements
that are beyond the learners’ capabilities so that they can focus on and mater
those features of the task that they can grasp quickly” (Schunk, 2004, p. 297).
The initial practice among the participants was to simplify the music, in one of
many ways. Aural instruction activities are scaffolded to gradually build
students’ confidence to improvise.
Compositional thinking was an aim of many of the participants.
Thornton (2013), who recommended beginning with improvisation to teach
composition, explored the connection between improvisation and
composition. “Improvisation for all musicians opens doors to a depth of
understanding about the music, about their instrument’s capabilities, and their
personal musical expression” (p. 15). This thought is consistent with the
positions of participants in this research, especially Damian, Harper, and
Geraldo.
Free improvisation was the final theme within aural instruction, and
findings align with Hickey’s (2015) research into the teaching of free
improvisation teachers, described above. In contrast, where her participants
were “comfortable being flexible and spontaneous, and confident that the
rehearsals would unfold successfully despite not having a clear plan” (p. 438),
70
my participants seem to have clear plans for using free improvisation to teach
students to improvise. This may be due to a difference in participants. Where
her participants were noted free improvisation teachers, mine were well-
respected improvisation teachers, university and high school jazz instructors
with years of experience, a high school orchestra teacher, and a keyboard
improvisation teacher. My participants use free improvisation as a tool for
other aims, such as compositional thinking, and confidence. Also, this
difference could be due to data collection type – my primary data collection
method was interview, with an observation used to reinforce (or challenge) the
theoretical structure emergent from participants stated intentions.
A limitation of this study was that I only interviewed two female
improvisation teachers, and both of my core participants were male. This was
due to the nature of recruitment – core participants were identified through
triangulation as expert improvisation teachers. Though these participants
focused on individual student needs above considerations of gender, the
findings in this study were in line with other research suggesting, “Women do
not participate in instrumental jazz in the same numbers as their male
colleagues at either the high school or college level” (McKeage, 2004, p. 355).
The current research suggests recruitment might help allay this problem, and
that female role models might be important to help female students become
confident music improvisers. Further, by serving as role models, female
improvisation teachers may benefit both female and male students. Future
research needs to purposely sample more female improvisation teachers to
71
more fully understand issues around gender and improvisation teaching
praxis, particularly by considering the role of recruitment and role models.
For instance, do female teachers foster more confident female student
improvisers?
The theme safe environment aligned with theatre improvisation
scholarship (Elkind, 1975; Madson, 2005). The current research addressed
games and the positive and negative aspects of peers to CMI. This theme also
connects to the essential theme of CMI, criticism-free environment (Shevock,
in-press-a).
Most of my teachers were jazz improvisation teachers. I was unable to
recruit a Baroque improvisation teacher through my contacts. Bernhard’s
(2014) suggested, “teachers who had no experience with jazz reported less
confidence teaching improvisation than those with jazz experience” (p. 10),
and the comparative ease of recruiting expert jazz improvisation teachers to
participate may reflect a limitation to the study’s implications more broadly.
However, by interviewing two improvisation teachers who did not primarily
teach jazz improvisation (Harper and Luc), an attempt was made by the
researcher to broaden the scope of these findings.
72
Chapter 5: Postlude
Summary
This dissertation represents a line of inquiry into confident music
improvising (CMI). As such, my evolving understanding of the concept, CMI,
through qualitative research was presented. Research into confidence and music
improvisation has looked at teacher confidence to teach improvisation (Bernhard,
2013; Bernhard, 2014; Madura Ward-Steinman, 2007) and confidence to
improvise within the construct of self-efficacy, especially as confidence is
affected by aural instruction (Watson, 2010) and gender (Alexander, 2012; Wehr-
Flowers, 2006). While this previous research had employed survey and quasi-
experimental design to help us understand confidence and music improvisation,
the line of inquiry presented in this dissertation was qualitative in nature,
presented from the lifeworld experiences of semi-professional improvising
musicians (chapter 2), observations of a summer jazz camp (chapter 3), and
conceptions of teaching praxes of expert improvisation teachers (chapter 4). This
dissertation was guided by the question, how do effective music improvisation
teachers teach students – who may be unconfident – to confidently improvise
music?
In chapter 2 of this dissertation, I discussed a phenomenological study
published in Research Studies in Music Education. There were two research
questions. What is the essence of confidence in music improvisation? What
experiences do confident improvisers describe as educative? The purpose was to
73
explore the essence of the experience of CMI. Three semi-professional
improvising musicians described experiences that helped them build their
confidence to improvise. Using Giorgi’s (2009) descriptive phenomenological
method, essential themes were revealed. The themes that emerged were listening,
criticism-free environment, sequential experiences, passion for a style, and
openness to learning. Three of the themes (listening, criticism-free environment,
and sequential experiences) were labeled as pedagogical themes, and two (passion
for a style, and openness to learning) dispositional themes.
In chapter 3 of this dissertation, I presented a case study. The case was the
jazz portion of a summer music camp. The guiding question was, what
techniques do instructors at a summer jazz camp use to increase the confidence of
students to improvise music? The purpose was to document CMI techniques used
to teach high school students attending a summer jazz camp. The primary data
was observations of improvisation teaching during the camp, online documents
describing the camp, and interviews with a past participant and the camp’s
founder. The pedagogical essential themes (listening, criticism-free environment,
and sequential experiences) were present among the camp’s classes, reinforcing
the strength of these themes. This study represented my change in focus from
learning CMI to teaching CMI. The emerging theme, teaching through questions,
was the initial teaching praxis identified in this line of inquiry.
Chapter 4 of this dissertation represents a widening of my understanding
of CMI. Building on chapter 3, my purpose was to understand praxes of teaching
CMI, that is, how expert improvisation teachers conceive the techniques they use
74
to increase student confidence to improvise music. There were two research
questions. What teaching praxes do participants use to help unconfident students
become confident music improvisers? How does student gender affect teaching
praxes? A responsive interviewing design (Rubin & Rubin, 2012) was used,
centering in on several in-depth interviews with triangulating data, including an
observation of a participant’s teaching, and documents including participants’
pedagogical and published materials. Theoretical and snowball sampling were
used to identify expert improvisation teachers, and two core participants were
identified through triangulation, recommended by multiple improvisation
teachers. Through data analysis, the following thematic structure emerged.
• Aural instruction o Culture of improvisation o Simplifying structures o Compositional thinking o Free improvisation
• Gender
o Recruitment o Role models
• Teaching through questions
• Time
• Visuals & technology
• Safe environment
o Games o Peers
Watson’s (2010) research indicates students’ self-efficacy improves through aural
instruction (in comparison to notated instruction). The most prominent theme of
praxes of CMI was aural instruction. Taken together, these studies reinforce the
75
importance of aural instruction to fostering confidence in students learning to
improvise music. Previously, I defined aural instruction in contrast to notated
instruction (having students play off of the page / without notated music). Aural
instruction consists of aural imitation teaching activities. This line of research
expanded my understanding of aural instruction. For instance, aural instruction
has a cultural element, especially in that certain instruments, like guitar and
drums, have a culture of improvisation because instruction is often aural. Further,
aural instruction can be taught through simplifying structures and by developing,
in students, compositional thinking. Additionally, free improvisation can be
employed as aural instruction praxis to help students become confident music
improvisers.
Returning to the idea of Small’s (1998) musicking, improvising musicians
enact rituals that represent a certain set of values – e.g. the importance of
individual and group expression, creativity – that may add weight to the
importance of confidence, especially in school music settings. If a musician is
unused to being expected to improvise, to compose music in the moment of
performance and to listen to and adjust to what other musicians in the group are
improvising, improvised musicking can become a struggle. In cultures of
improvisation (guitar and drums) where improvisation is the norm, all students
experience CMI. Confidence is important in music improvising because music
improvising is not the primary way many musicians in school music programs
regularly music.
76
The findings around gender are in line with McKeage (2004), who found
female students do not participate in jazz as much as male students. Recruitment
as a praxis of CMI becomes paramount. McKeage (2014) also found female role
models important for female jazz students. The current dissertation extends
McKeage’s (2014) writing by suggesting female role models may be important
for male as well as female students.
Discussion
I taught improvisation in elementary band and orchestra in the Pittsburgh
Public Schools. This teaching inspired me to return to university to earn a
doctorate in music education with the intention of researching improvisation.
Guided by an interest in music improvisation, I realized there was not enough
research exploring CMI and that many musicians seemed to have confidence
issues around improvising music. While conducting this line of research, I reread
the first book on improvisation I read, Stephen Nachmanovitch’s (1990) Free
play: Improvisation in life and art, and was surprised how relevant (25 years after
its publication) this short philosophical treatise is, and how consistent his theory is
with my findings.
For Nachmanovitch (1990), improvisation is one expression of a larger
concept, the free play of consciousness, which has a spiritual aspect connected to
spontaneous creation, Zen, liberation, and authentic voice. An improvising
violinist, Nachmanovitch “came to see improvisation as a master key to
creativity” (p. 6). He described the creative process as like a crystal.
77
No matter which facet we gaze into, we see all the others reflected… [we]
look into a number of facets, then keep returning to them from different
angles as the view becomes deeper and more complete. These
interreflecting themes, the prerequisites of creation, are playfulness, love,
concentration, practice, skill, using the power of limits, using the power of
mistakes, risk, surrender, patience, courage, and trust. (Nachmanovitch,
1990, p. 12)
Reflecting on Nachmanovitch’s interreflecting themes, it became easy to see the
essential themes (which helped confident improvisers build confidence to
improvise music) of my phenomenological study in Nachmanovitch’s work.
Further, the praxes for CMI are present (see Figure 5.1: Interreflecting Themes) –
e.g. simplifying structures reflects the power of limits, and free improvisation and
safe environment align with Nachmanovitch’s (1990) practice, “totally judgment
free, discrimination-free” (p. 70).
In the same interreflecting way, the essential themes of my
phenomenological study are reflected in the themes of praxes of CMI that I shared
in Chapter 4. The primary essential theme, listening, has a direct relationship
with the most prominent theme of the praxes of CMI, aural instruction. We, as
improvisation teachers, teach students to listen to each other while performing,
and to listen to recordings to learn an improvisatory style, but Nachmanovitch
adds a layer to aural instruction, listening to the muse. “The whole essence of
bringing art into life is learning to listen to that guiding voice” (p. 41). The muse
whose voice we must hear is the genius of the individual, and the genii of a group
78
of improvisers. Because the ways we music represent ideal relationships about
what we believe of the world (Small, 1998), improvisation pedagogy has
implications far beyond the school walls or concert halls. I believe a pedagogy
empowering confidence can free musicians to play, improvisationally, in musical
dialogue with others, and can, in-turn, fuel confidence to live creatively and
respect others, essential qualities for democratic living in the 21st century.
Recommendations
Further research and theoretical work is recommended exploring CMI, and
should include historical design. Historical research into CMI might provide
insights that go unconsidered by 21st century teachers. Due to both the current
study and my historical research on the spiritual aspects of improvisation
pedagogue Satis Coleman’s music education philosophy (Shevock, in-press-b), I
began to wonder if confidence was an issue for her students. Historical research
may illuminate her awareness of issues of confidence to improvising music. It
may be that she and other historical improvisation teachers, such as Carl Orff and
Donald Pond, were aware of the confidence issue. My research into the spiritual
aspects of Coleman’s music education philosophy helped me consider spiritual
aspects of teaching and learning I had not previously considered.
Other research designs might also provide fruitful ways to further our
understandings of CMI. Just as the pedagogical essential themes of CMI were
reinforced through a case study, a case study using the themes of praxes of CMI
might be used to confirm this theoretical structure. Such a case study might
explore one theme in depth. Survey research might be used to find the extent to
79
which teachers are using each of these themes to build students confidence, and
experimental design can be used to confirm each of these themes within specific
contexts.
Conclusions
Conducting this line of inquiry has been fulfilling for me as a music
teacher and scholar. This is a line of inquiry I intend to continue exploring. Since
praxis involves informing teaching with theory and theory with teaching practice
(Freire, 1970/93), researching CMI has made me more sensitive to issues of
student confidence, and how teaching praxis can foster confidence to improvise,
empowering students to create. It has also provided a structure around which I
can construct lesson plans with the express intention of improving student
confidence to improvise.
Confident improvisers may be better prepared to be agents acting in the
world through musical action. As I teach improvisation in the future, I will
saturate the learning environment with aural instruction, including exercises to
help develop compositional thinking, such as helping beginning improvisation
students develop a wider palette in relation to dissonances. I also intend to make
more use of free improvisation as a pedagogical tool. I have, in my work with
Jazz Combo Lab, taught free jazz, and allowed students to group-compose their
own free jazz pieces. I have not, however, used free improvisation in private
lessons, nor early in class instruction, and free improvisation may have
pedagogical benefits for students I have underexplored.
80
I believe that the findings around gender have also affected how I think
about my teaching praxis. I have not previously focused on recruitment or on
bringing in female role models to perform for my students, though these actions
may help female and male students. And an understanding of evolving societal
expectations (see Narrative 4.1: Societal Expectations) for women improvisers
can increase my awareness as a teacher.
I think more needs to be understood about CMI, especially around the
theme of gender. Previous research has looked at gender issues in relation to jazz
improvisation. Is the gender issue relevant to non-jazz styles? Future research
exploring the nature of CMI and gender should prove fruitful. Nonetheless, this
dissertation represents a substantial, inductively formed addition to the Music
Education profession. The research in this dissertation, when understood in
context with the work of other researchers in confidence to teach improvisation,
confident improvising, gender, and aural pedagogy, can guide music teachers to
nurture confident, agentic, creative improvisers.
81
References
Alexander, M. L. (2012). Fearless improvisation: A pilot study to analyze string
students’ confidence, anxiety, and attitude toward learning improvisation.
Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 31(2), 25-33. DOI:
10/1177/8755123312457884.
Allsup, R. E. (1997). Activating self-transformation through improvisation in
instrumental music teaching. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 5(2),
80-85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40495428.
Allsup, R. E. & Baxter, M. (2004). Talking about music: Better questions? Better
discussions! Music Educators Journal, 91(2), 29-33. doi:
10.2307/3400046.
Avni-Babad, D. (2011). Routines and feelings of safety, confidence, and well-
being. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 223-244.
DOI: 10.1348/000712610X513617.
Azzara, C. D. (1993). Audiation-based improvisation techniques and elementary
instrumental students’ music achievement. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 41(4), 328-342. DOI: 10.2307/3345508.
Bailey, D. (1992). Improvisation: Its nature and practice in music. Ashborune:
Da Capo Press.
Beitler, N. (2012). The effects of collaborative reflection on the improvisation
achievement of seventh and eighth grade instrumental music students
(Doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, PA.
82
Beitler, N. & Thornton, L. (2010). Enhancing the instrumental music program
with creativity. In Clements, A. C. (Ed.) Alternative approaches in music
education. 161-173. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Benson, B. E. (2003). The improvisation of musical dialogue: A phenomenology
of music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berliner, P. F. (1994). Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Bernhard, C. H. (2013). Music education majors’ confidence in teaching
improvisation. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 22(2), 65-72. DOI:
10.1177/1057083712458593.
Bernhard, C. H. (2014). Instrumental music educators’ confidence in teaching
improvisation. Visions of Research in Music Education, 25, 1-16.
Retrieved from http://www.rider.edu/~vrme.
Borgo, D. (2007). Free jazz in the classroom: An ecological approach to music
education. Jazz Perspectives, 1(1), 61-68. DOI:
10.1080/17494060601061030.
Burnard, P. (2002). Investigating children’s meaning-making and the emergence
of musical interaction in group improvisation. British Journal of Research
in Music Education, 19(2), 157-172. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/200960467.
Caudwell, J. (2010). The jazz-sport analogue: Passing notes on gender and
sexuality. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 42(2), 240-248.
DOI: 10.1177/1012690209357120.
83
Coker, J. (1964). Improvising jazz. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Dahl, L. (1984). Stormy weather: The music and lives of a century of jazzwomen.
New York: Limelight Editions.
Della Pietra, C. J., & Campbell, P. S. (1995). An ethnography of improvisation
training in a music methods course. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 43(2), 112-126. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3345673.
Decrop, A. (1999). Triangulation in qualitative tourism research. Tourism
Management. 20. 157-161. DOI: 10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00102-2.
Dewey, J. (1909). Moral principles in education. Seaside: Watchmaker
Publishing.
Dewey, J. (1938/97). Experience & education. New York: Touchstone.
Elkind, S. (1975). Improvisation handbook. Glenview: Scott, Foresman and
Company.
Elliott, D. J. & Silverman, M (1995/2014). Music matters: A philosophy of music
education, second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Evans, J., Bell, J. L., Sweeney, A. E., Morgan, J. I., & Kelly, H. M. (2010).
Confidence in critical care nursing, Nursing Science Quarterly, 23(4),
334-340. DOI: 10.1177/0894318410380253.
Freire, P. (1970/93). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury
Publishing.
Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A
modified Huesserlian approach. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.
84
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th
edition). Boston: Pearson.
Gordon, E. E. (2003). Improvisation in classroom music. Chicago: GIA
Publications.
Green, L. (1997). Music, gender, education. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom
pedagogy. Burlington: Ashgate.
Gruenhagen, L. M. & Whitcomb, R. (2014). Improvisational practices in
elementary general music classrooms. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 61(4), 379-395. DOI: 10.1177/0022429413508586.
Hallam, S. (2010. The power of music: Its impact on the intellectual, social and
personal development of children and young people. International Journal
of Music Education, 28(3), 269-289. DOI: 10.1177/0255761410370658.
Hamilton, A. (2000). The art of improvisation and the aesthetics of imperfection.
British Journal of Aesthetics, 40(1), 168-185. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/42961880.
Hannel, I. (2009). Insufficient questioning: Effective questioning can keep
students interested and improve their learning, Phi Delta Kappan, 91(3),
65-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40345093.
Henley, J., Caulfield, L. S., Wilson, D., & Wilkinson, D. J. (2012). Good
vibrations: Positive change through social music-making. Music
85
Education Research, 14(4), 499-520. doi:
10.1080/14613808.2012.714765.
Hickey, M. (2009). Can improvisation be ‘taught’?: A call for free improvisation
in our schools. International Journal of Music Education, 27(4), 285-299.
DOI: 10.1177/0255761409345442.
Hickey, M. (2015). Learning from the experts: A study of free-improvisation
pedagogues in university settings. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 62(4), 425-445. doi: 10.1177/0022429414556319.
Hollis, R. (2008). With high confidence. The World Today, 64(1), 4-6.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40477928.
Jones, J. E. (1997). A lesson in teaching art self-confidence from drawing on the
right side of the brain. Art Education, 50(2), 33-38.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193641.
Kennedy, M. A. (2000). Creative music making since the time of the singing
schools: Fringe benefits, Journal of Historical Research in Music
Education, 21(2), 132-148. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40215214.
Kingscott, J., & Durrant, C. (2010). Keyboard improvisation: A
phenomenological study. International Journal of Music Education, 28(2),
127-144. DOI: 10.1177/0255761410362941.
Koutsoupidou, T. (2005). Improvisation in the English primary music classroom:
Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Music Education Research, 7(3),
363-381. DOI: 10.1080/14613800500324432.
86
Limb, C. J., & Braun, A. R. (2008). Neural substrates of spontaneous musical
performance: An fMRI study of jazz improvisation. PLoS ONE, 3(2), 1-9.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001679.
Loveless, T. (1997). The structure of public confidence in education. American
Journal of Education, 105(2), 127-159.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1085616.
MacDonald, R. A. R., & Wilson, G. B. (2006). Constructions of jazz: How jazz
musicians present their collaborative musical practice. Musicae Scientiae,
10(2), 59-83. DOI: 10.1177/102986490601000104.
Madsen, C. K., & Duke, R. A. (1999). First remembered responses to music.
General Music Today, 13(1), 19-22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3345358.
Madson, P. R. (2005). Improv wisdom: Don’t prepare, just show up. New York:
Bell Tower.
Madura Ward-Steinman, P. (2007). Confidence in teaching improvisation
according to the K-12 achievement standards: Surveys of vocal jazz
workshop participants and undergraduates, Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, 172, 25-40.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40319363.
Marsalis, W. (2008). Why teach jazz? In Miles, R. & Carter, R. (Eds.) Teaching
music through performance in jazz. 3-11. Chicago: GIA.
Martin, J. (2005). Composing and improvising. In Elliott, D. J. (Ed.) Praxial
music education: Reflections and dialogues. 165-176. New York: Oxford
University Press.
87
May, L. F. (2003). Factors and abilities influencing achievement in instrumental
jazz improvisation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(3), 245-
258. DOI: 10.2307/3345377.
McKeage, K. M. (2004). Gender and participation in high school and college
instrumental jazz ensembles. Journal of Research in Music Education,
52(4), 343-356. doi: 10.1177/002242940405200406.
McKeage, K. M. (2014). “Where are all the girls?” Women in collegiate
instrumental jazz. Gender, Education, Music, and Society, 7(3). Retrieved
1/7/2015 from
http://www.queensu.ca/music/links/gems/past/No.%201/KMarticle.htm
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in
education. San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers.
[Mid-Atlantic Public University] Outreach Marketing and Communications.
(2011). Jazz band. [Mid-Atlantic] Summer Music Camp. Retrieved
February 24, 2012, from http://www.outreach.psu.edu/programs/music-
camps.
Nachmanovitch, S. (1990). Free play: Improvisation in life and art. New York:
Putnam.
Nettl, B. (2009). On learning the radif and improvisation in Iran. In Solis, G. &
Nettl, B. (Eds.) Musical improvisation: Art, education, and society 185-
199. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
88
Norgaard, M. (2011). Descriptions of improvisational thinking by artist-level jazz
musicians. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(2), 109-127. DOI:
10.1177/0022429411405669.
Pajares, F. & Johnson, M. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing: The
role of self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension. Research in
the Teaching of English, 28(3), 313-331.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40171341.
Randles, C. (2009). ‘That’s my piece, that’s my signature, and it means more…’:
Creative identity and the ensemble teacher/ arranger. Research Studies in
Music Education, 31(1), 52-68. doi: 10.1177/1321103X09103631.
Regelski, T. A. (1998). The Aristotelian bases of praxis for music and music
education as praxis. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 6(1), 22-59.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40327113.
Robinson, K. (2001/11). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. Chichester,
UK: Capstone Publishing.
Robinson, N. G., Bell, C. L., & Pogonowski, L. (2011). The creative music
strategy: A seven-step instructional model. Music Educators Journal,
97(3), 50-55. DOI: 10.1177/0027432110395945
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing
data, second edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing
data, third edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
89
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand
Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Sawyer, K. (1992). Improvisational creativity: An analysis of jazz performance.
Creativity Research Journal, 5(3), 253-263. DOI:
10.1080/1040041920953449.
Scheib, J. W. (2012). Empowering preservice music teachers through the
dialogue-centered methods class. Journal of Music Teacher Education,
22(1), 103-112. doi: 10.1177/1057083711430394.
Schmidt, P. (2005). Music education as transformative practice: Creating new
frameworks for learning music through a Freirian perspective. Visions of
Research in Music Education, 6. http://www.rider.edu/~vrme.
Schopp, S. E. (2006). A study of the effects of national standards for music
education, number 3, improvisation and number 4, composition on high
school band instruction in New York State. (Doctoral dissertation).
Schunk, D. H. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective, fourth
edition. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers
in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shevock, D. J. (in-press-a). The experience of confident musical improvising.
Research Studies in Music Education.
Shevock, D. J. (in-press-b). Satis Coleman: A spiritual philosophy for music
education. Music Educators Journal.
90
Shevock, D. J. (in-press-c). Reflections on Freirean pedagogy in a jazz combo lab
Action, Theory, and Criticism for Music Education.
Shevock, D. J. (2013, February). Teaching confidence: Improvisation at a summer
jazz camp. Paper presented at the Suncoast Music Education Research
Symposium IX, Tampa, FL.
Shevock, D. J. (2013, November). A grounded definition of confident music
improvisation: Perceptions among university improvisation teachers.
Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Society for Music Education in Ireland
Conference, Dublin, Ireland.
Shevock, D. J. (2014, April). Simulation in practicing music improvisation:
Improvisers, technology and hyperreality. Paper presented at the 2014
NAfME Music Research and Teacher Education National Conference,
Creativity SRIG, St. Louis, MO.
Sidran, B. (1992). Talking jazz: An oral history. New York: Da Capo Press.
Small, C. (1998). Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening.
Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.
Small, C. (2001). Why doesn’t the whole world love chamber music? American
Music, 19(3), 340-359. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3052477.
Snell, A. H. (2013 April). Creativity in instrumental music education. Paper
presented at the annual conference of the Pennsylvania Music Educators
Association. Erie, PA. http://www.pmea.net/wp-
content/uploads/2013/07/snellabstract2013.pdf.
91
Strand, K. (2006). Survey of Indiana music teachers on using composition in the
classroom. Journal of Rsearch in Music Education, 54(2), 154-167.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40101437.
Stringham, D., Thornton, L. C. & Shevock, D. J. (2013 September). Navigating
the locus of change: Instrumental music teacher educators’ perceptions of
creative music-making in methods courses. Paper presented at the Society
for Music Teacher Education Symposium, Greensboro, NC.
Tett, G. (2011). Crisis in confidence. RSA Journal, 157(5547), 36-39.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41380116.
Thornton, L. (2013). Starting with improvisation. In Randles, C. & Stringham, D.
(Eds.) Musicianship: Composing in band and orchestra. 15-26. Chicago:
GIA Publications.
Watson, K. E. (2010). The effects of aural versus notated instructional materials
on achievement and self-efficacy in jazz improvisation. Journal of
Research in Music Education, 58(3), 240-259. DOI:
10.1177/0022429410377115.
Webster, P. R. (1990). Creative thinking in music: Introduction. Music Educators
Journal. 76(9), 21. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3401072.
Wehr-Flowers, E. (2006). Differences between male and female students’
confidence, anxiety, and attitude toward learning jazz improvisation.
Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 337-349.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4139755.
92
Wilson, G. B. & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2012). The sign of silence: Negotiating
musical identities in an improvising ensemble. Psychology of Music,
40(5), 558-573. DOI: 10.1177/0305735612449506.
Wolak, J. & Palus, C. K. (2010). The dynamics of public confidence in U. S. state
and local government. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 10(4), 421-445.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41427034.
Wright, R., & Kanellopoulos, P. (2010). Informal music learning, improvisation
and teacher education. British Journal of Music Education, 27, 71-87.
93
Appendices
Table 4.1: Sample Interview Segments Luc 11/06/2014
Time File name Descriptive coding 00:00 – 01:00
Seg1.Interview.11.6.2014.Luc.mp4 Introductory discussion
01:00 – 04:31
Seg2.Interview.11.6.2014.Luc.mp4 String students often have good ears but classical training. Technology – Delay pedal, extemporaneous canons. Major tonality. Blues tonality foreign. Pitfall – too much too quickly. Well-known melodies. Diatonic. Comfortable with modality. Off page (aural).
04:31 – 07:30
Seg3.Interview.11.6.2014.Luc.mp4 Beginning of improvisational instruction, folk tunes. Full-on aural instruction. Antecedent/consequent. Aural teaching is everything. Suzuki helps. Oriented toward listening. Ear to hand. Strolling experience, away from page in style. Classical improvising.
07:30 – 09:44
Seg4.Interview.11.6.2014.Luc.mp4 Classical training Question. Vast majority are not comfortable. Traditional environment, exactly what’s written. Creativity and expression inside of the written. Improvising violinist. Improvisation changes everything.
09:44 – 11:53
Seg5.Interview.11.6.2014.Luc.mp4 Culture of improvising question. A garage/bedroom culture. Trial and error. Cultures come in a lot of shapes and forms. Appalachian fiddle. Turtle Island String Quartet, strong public presence. String students are much more apt to try improvising.
94
Table 4.2: Participant Information Pseudonyms Participant Data Instrument Sex Style(s)
taught Sampling
Hank Interview (in-person) – 10/20/2014 Pedagogical documents Interview (in-person) 11/6/2014 1PM Observation (in-person) 12/8/2014
Saxophone Male Jazz Initial interview – recommended as an “expert improvisation teacher” by two university-level jazz band instructors, and one music education professor who conducts improvisation research and gives clinics on improvisation.
Hunter Interview (in-person) – 10/22/2014
Guitar Male Jazz Theoretical – based on Hank’s description of guitar students as more confident than wind students.
Harper Interview (in-person) 11/5/2014
Piano Female Classical, Improvisation
Theoretical – based on Hank’s discussion of piano students. Female improvisation teacher.
Luc Interview (phone) 11/6/2014 10AM
Violin Male Smooth jazz, pop
Theoretical – looking for potential contrasting opinion, based on different medium and style taught.
Julian Interview (phone) 11/6/2014 5PM
Saxophone Male Jazz Snowball – Recommended by Hank
Damian Interview (phone) 11/7/2014 Interview (phone) 12/21/2014
Bass Male Jazz Recommended as an “expert improvisation teacher” by two university, and one high school-level jazz band instructors
Henri Interview (in-person) 12/10/2014
Saxophone Male NA (Student) Theoretical – Student taught in Hank’s observation
Margery Interview (phone) 12/16/2014
Voice, Bass Female Jazz Snowball – Recommended by Hank. Female improvisation teacher.
Heath Interview (in-person) 12/17/2014
Tuba Male NA (Student) Theoretical – Student taught in Hank’s observation
Geraldo Interview (phone) 12/26/2014
Trombone, Piano
Male Jazz Snowball – Recommended by Hank
95
Figure 4.1: Sampling Chart
Hank (Core Participant)
Julian (snowball sampling)
Margery (snowball sampling)
Geraldo (snowball sampling)
Damian (Core
Participant)
Hunter, guitar
Harper, piano
Luc, violin (negative case)
Students
Henri (more
experienced)
Heath (less experienced)
96
Narrative 4.1: Societal Expectations
Both Harper and Margery saw female confidence issues with music
improvisation as connected to societal expectations of women, generally.
“Boys are encouraged to break boundaries and innovate. And girls, I think,
are more often raised to obey the rules. I think that improvisation, often, is
associated with the breaking of boundaries” (Harper, personal communication,
November 5, 2014). Margery sees the situation as improving.
It’s that their parents brought them up to be more soft and tender. For
years it really had been an issue. It has been an issue that the girls just
didn’t have the same strong attitude in their playing that the boys did.
Now that’s changing in our society, and girls are portrayed as
everything from sports players, to superheroes, to CEOs. Women are
portrayed in much stronger roles and I think that is starting to balance
out. There are not as many differences between the way boys play and
girls play, and I’m glad to see that happening. It’s pretty equal now,
but years ago it was not. (Margery, personal communication,
December 16, 2014)
The theme, societal expectations, aligns with Lucy Green (1997) who, in her
discussion of composition and improvisation wrote, “Rational man has been
constructed as in control of his body, emotional woman as subject to its
vicissitudes; technical man as in control of nature, sensuous woman as part of it,
to be controlled” (p. 85). I believe this understanding of man as in control but of
women as vessels to be controlled can negatively affect female students’
97
confident to improvise music. The findings on societal expectations suggest it
may be that this construction is improving for women improvisers; what Green
labels “patriarchal conceptions of femininity” (p. 113) seem to be in the process
of being interrupted. The portrayal, in the media, of women in “much stronger
roles” (Margery, personal communication, December 16, 2014), as well as
women improvisers serving as strong role models, may be helping both women
and men understand women as able to be in control of nature, in this case,
through confidently improvising music.
98
Figure 5.1: Interreflecting Themes
Simplifying structures
Free improvisation & safe environment Aural instruction (praxis)
Safe environment (praxis)
The power of limits (Nachmanovitch, 1990) Practice, “totally judgment free, discrimination-‐free” (p. 70)
Listening (essential theme) Criticism-‐free environment (essential theme)
CURRICULUM VITAE: Daniel J. Shevock
PROFESSIONAL PREPARATION: Ph.D. (ABD), Music Education, The Pennsylvania State University, 2015 M.S., Music Education, Towson University, August 2000 B.S.Ed., Music Education, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, July 1997 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Internship, The Pennsylvania State University, Spring 2014 Teaching Assistant, The Pennsylvania State University 2011-2014 Music Teacher, The Pittsburgh Public Schools (PA), 2000-2011 Music Teacher, Harford County Public Schools (MD), 1997-1998
REFEREED PUBLICATIONS: Shevock, D. J. (in press). Reflections on Freirean pedagogy in a jazz combo lab.
Action, Theory, and Criticism for Music Education (Refereed journal) Shevock, D. J. (in press). The experience of confident music improvising. Research
Studies in Music Education (Refereed journal) Shevock, D. J. (in press). Satis Coleman: A spiritual philosophy for music education.
Music Educators Journal (Refereed journal) RECENT PAPER PRESENTATIONS: “Context for the content”: Exploring the possibility of a democratic application of
Gordon’s music learning theory, Research presented at the 9th International Conference for Research in Music Education, Exeter, England, UK. April 15, 2015
Reflections on anti-authoritarian pedagogy in a jazz combo lab, Research presented at the MayDay Group Colloquium 26: Co-constructing our musicing education. Gettysburg, PA. June 20, 2014.
“I was the only Black person in the class”: An African American undergraduate’s experience navigating music education at a predominantly White institution, Research presented at the 2014 NAfME Music Research and Teacher Education National Conference. St. Louis, MO. April 11, 2014.
A grounded definition of confident music improvisation: Perceptions among university improvisation teachers, Research presented at the 3rd Annual Society for Music Education in Ireland/Cumann Ceol Oideachais na hÉireann Conference. Drumcondra, Dublin, Ireland. November 1, 2013.
RECENT REFEREED WORKSHOPS: Fighting institutional marginalization in music education, Session presented at the
2014 NAfME Music Research and Teacher Education National Conference. St. Louis, MO. Presented with Kruse, A., Palkki, J. & Hess, J. April 11, 2014.
Democracy in band: Strategies for greater student ownership at all levels, Session presented at the 2014 PMEA Annual In-service Conference. Hershey, PA. Presented with Thornton, L. C. & Gossett, J. B. March 28, 2014.
RECENT PANELS (INVITED): Panel on democracy and education, Giving Voice to Democracy in Music Education
Conference, Montclair, NJ. Facilitator: Marissa Silverman. Respondents: Jennifer Robinson, Daniel J. Shevock, and Emily James. June 21, 2014.
top related